Talk:Women in punk rock

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ArmatageRush.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Refining Article

Over the next week or so, I plan on refining this article. For an article that appears to have been edited by only a few people, it is a decent piece. There is work to be done, though. In the introduction, there is a misplaced sentence that either needs to be edited out or added onto another existing section. In the "History" section, the actual history needs to be added in. Currently, that section focuses on the roles women played in other popular genres of music; there is no information about punk rock's roots, how/when women came into the picture, or outside influences (political or social) on the genre. The facts that are in that section now can be used for transitions or comparisons. The bits that are completely irrelevant though, need to be edited out. Additionally, I would like to contribute more information to the Riot Grrrl Section and maybe move it out of the 1990's decade subtitle. Riot Grrrl was a social movement, rather than a musical artist like the rest of the listings under the various decade sections. Finally, as I come across more female artists that have been critical to the punk rock scene, I want to ensure that they are included in this article if they seem relevant enough to this topic. ArmatageRush (talk) 15:22, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you ArmatageRush for your contributions, and for taking up the project of developing this article. Netherzone (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I added the section on Tina Bell. I believe there is enough anecdotal accounts to justify this addition. The citations are included, please go through them. I could not find any CC usage pics.--Floorlibrarian (talk) 12:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Floorlibrarian, Thank you for your note. Re: Tina Bell: I have removed the entry as she does not yet have a wikipedia article, see WP:WTAF - per past discussions re: this article should only include artists who are notable per WP:NMG and WP:MUSICBIO criteria and have a wikipedia article (all blue links). Citations should be in reliable sources (not blogs, user-submitted sites or personal websites). See WP:RS. I saw that you are working on a draft article for Tina Bell; if the draft makes it through Articles for Creation, she can be included in this article in the 1980s "Other artists" section. Please note that the longer entries are for artists with more substantial careers and significant coverage WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS over many years.) Ping me if you have any questions, or would like another pair of eyes on your draft. Netherzone (talk) 15:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the look through. I hope Tina Bell article makes it through the draft process. I do think Tina Bell is a notable addition to this section. I think the information presented about her in the sources is enough to warrant her addition to the women in punk rock. With regard to the sources: 1. the articles from Zora by S Siek, is for a magazine published online that highlights marginalization of black women. It has editors, so it's not a blog site https://zora.medium.com/about 2. Please kill me, is a site to accompany the book Please Kill me: The uncensored history of punk. The site offers additional articles as addendum to the Book. Thank you for the offer of a pair of eyes. I will await the eventual completion of the draft process. --Floorlibrarian (talk) 13:12, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Floorlibrarian, I am travelling at this time, so can't get to it for a few days, but when I return, I will have another look at the draft, and will upload a fair-use non-free image to that article. Let's revisit the WPR article once the draft makes it thru AfC. Best regards, Netherzone (talk) 20:22, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Riot grrl?

An article on women in punk with no mention of riot grrl? Seriously? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.1.246 (talk) 23:11, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Go for it! Please develop that subsequent historical phenomena if of interest. Netherzone (talk) 14:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

No Lene Lovich either!

Contribute, anonymous user, it's more effective than complaining. Lene Lovich is great - go for it. Netherzone (talk) 15:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

History Section

I just added a few sentences to the history section after finding out some new information from a credible article that I recently read. I want to continue beefing up the history section; I do not feel that it focuses enough on punk rock. It mainly discusses how women do not play a large role in other genres, which is not the focus of this article.

ArmatageRush (talk) 20:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi ArmatageRush. Can you please clarify "this" in your most recent contribution? The vague pronoun creates some confusion in understanding what led young women to feel disenfranchised. Thanks in advance for clearing up the pronoun reference.Jagrif02 (talk) 12:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for catching that, Jagrif02! I made some changes to that contribution and hope that I have cleared up the confusion. ArmatageRush (talk) 13:52, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I am new here so I apologize if I’m not following proper etiquette or procedures. In the history section there’s reference to Joan Jett in the LA punk scene. Joan Jett didn’t have anything whatsoever to do with the scene. I was there. I saw all the bands. She has zero to do with this music scene. The runaways were not part of the punk scene and were thought of as a joke. They were promoted at the Whiskey a couple of times and then a record label package them and had them tour with bands like Cheap Trick. I think because the glam song Cherry Bomb sounded a little punk, some later writers tried to throw the Runaways in with the punk movement. They didn’t have anything to do with it. A friend thinks this comes from an article in Vice that some other outlets picked up on, That article really got it wrong. I’m still in touch with guys from the Weirdos, the Dickies, the Nuns and I think it’s crazy that The Runaways were early punk band. Only Lita Ford could play an instrument and they were a package novelty act. No one ever saw or met Joan Jett in the club scene. MLAheyhey1900 (talk) 05:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for your interest in this subject. You posted your comment in the right place. It may seem counter intuitive but because we are an encyclopedia, everything that is written here must be backed up by verifiable, independent, reliable sources. (See WP:V and WP:RS. Personal opinions or personal experiences are considered original research (See WP:OR and are not permitted, and we must go by what the sources (references) say. Many publications and books associate Jett with punk whether or not you (nor I for that matter) may believe differently. If you can find and add sources that say she was mistakenly associated with the punk genre, then the content could be changed to reflect both analyses, if consensus is established here on article talk. Netherzone (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Riot grrrl section

Hi OnBeyondZebrax - Thanks so much for your contribution to the Riot grrrl section, and your interest in women in punk rock! I'm wondering if this recent edit is too long in relation to other parts of the article, and wanted to reach out to you for discussion before an "excessively long" tag was placed on the section. It would be great if the entire article was this comprehensive and it could be improved to a good article, however at this time, do you think it's unbalanced? Would you be interested in working together to develop the article overall? Netherzone (talk) 18:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I will relocate it to the history section and shorten it. Good idea!OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 03:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your excellent contributions, I'm very glad that someone has taken an interest in helping out to develop this article! Netherzone (talk) 14:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I added a small paragraph about a movement that responded to Riot grrrl. This movement was covered extensively in a new documentary, Turn it Around: The Story of East Bay Punk. I want to continue editing this section to include more bands that were involved in the less-aggressive feminist movement of the East Bay area. ArmatageRush (talk) 01:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

2010s section

I created the 2010s section. I confined myself to bands that already have a Wikipedia article, but some other UK-based 2010s bands which probably do merit inclusion in this section include Hands Off Gretel, Healthy Junkies, Pussycat And The Dirty Johnsons, Kiss My Acid, Dragster, The Soap Girls and Brains All Gone. Perhaps someone could have a go at creating articles for these - and adding entries to the 2010s section. (Also as a general resource for female UK punk bands in the present day, check out Steve Iles's "Stepunker" Youtube channel. No I'm not Steve, although he's a great guy who does a lot of positive work for female bands) 62.190.148.115 (talk) 10:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Apparently there is an abandoned AfC of Pussycat and the Dirty Johnsons: [1] 62.190.148.115 (talk) 11:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

There should also be a mention of all-female Punk trbute/covers artists such as The Ramonas and The Sex Pissed Dolls, both of whom have enjoyed a high profile in the UK in recent years and are both probably Wikinotable in their own rights. 86.131.191.251 (talk) 13:26, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. Netherzone (talk) 18:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Added a Pussycat and the Dirty Johnsons article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Romomusicfan (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Too American

I've tagged this article as being biased towards America, at least in some sections like the history.

The Hurricane Katrina stuff for example is mainly of interest to Americans. Where for example is the wider stuff about German and Japanese women in punk? Or Aussies? Please don't ask me to write something about this, I don't know enough about the subject.

As the author of the 2010s section, I'd say that my work was rather more slanted towards the UK scene (Pussy Riot notwithstanding) and the same goes for my suggestions for further entries above. But then I write about what I know about and hopefully others can fill in about the scene elsewhere in the world. 62.190.148.115 (talk) 11:17, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions, anonymous editors. Please do tag other editors who you think may help to broaden the international scope of this article. Netherzone (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

"Not Notable Enough"  ???

Netherzone, either something is notable or it isn't and if a band/singer passes WP:BAND and/or WP:GNC then it/she is notable, end of story. Please can you point me to where on Wikipedia are the set of criteria you have used to judge whether something is "notable enough" to represent a decade? I was prepared to let go your relegation of The Kut as their article is admittedly poorly referenced (although still enough to pass WP:BAND) and there is a fair case to be made for them being a 2000s act rather than a 2010s act. To say that Louise Distras is "not notable enough" an example of female/female-led acts on the 2010s Punk scene is, in layperson terms, patently ridiculous as, from an overview of the 2010s punk scene, (leaving aside older surviving acts from past decades) she is one of the major players on the punk scene in the 2010s, regardless of gender.

Now, if one were writing a general guide to female or female-led acts on the 2010s Punk scene, certainly in the UK, then there would be about a dozen to twenty acts one would list to give a fair overview of the scene and Lousie Distras would be top of the list alongside Hands Off Gretel. For the purpose of Wikipedia, however, a reasonable compromise from that position is to restrict oneself to those bands who in themselves have the sources available to be Wiki-notable and so have their won article (the around half a dozen acts listed until a few days ago). That, as far as I am aware and can imagine, is the only criteria by which bands on Wikipedia can be notable or indeed "notable enough". I try not to assume bad faith, but your removal of Distras from the 2010s section of the article causes me to believe that your long term strategy is to remove all acts from the 2010s section (except possibly {Pussy Riot]], an act famous more for their legal troubles with the Russian government than for their actual career as a band.)

For now, I have just about resisted the temptation to just simply revert your deletions. But if you cannot show me that you are working to something other than your own arbitary assesments as to what is "notable enough" then I shall further escalate this issue. Incidentally, I wonder how many of the musicians in earlier decade sessions would pass muster under your concept of "notable enough to represent a decade" ? FYI, the Slits remained an unsigned act until after Budgie had replaced Palmolive in 1979 and the band had adopted a less punk, more reggae based sound. Palmolive's later band the Raincoats never progressed beyond the UK Independent charts, in which The Kut have also recently scored.81.158.134.39 (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

I have replied here: Wikipedia talk:Notability#"Notable enough to represent a decade" ??? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

81.158.134.39 - You seem to be over-reacting - why not simply have a conversation on the talk page about it from the get-go rather than responding in such an aggressive manner? I am not here to argue, but rather to improve the article, enyclopedia, and the coverage of women's history. In fact, I created the article! It would be terrific to evolve it to a good article. Having said, that, I certainly don't feel a sense of ownership, as I've actively asked other editors to contribute. Nor am I (as you implied on the WP:Notability page), that I'm somehow deconstructing the 2010s. Why on earth would I want to do that? I'm not a deletionist, as you can see on my user page. How about if we work together on this as fellow editors in a civilized manner? Netherzone (talk) 22:04, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Netherzone, I'll take your word for it that you are not a deletionist, but your relegation of Louise Distras seemed just simply bizarre, as (after Pussy Riot) she was about the highest profile act in the 2010s section. If someone like her can't represent a decade, who can? Personally I thought the section was quite reasonable as it was, the half dozen or so 2010s female/female-led Punk bands which actually have Wikipedia articles. They were as reasonable enough a sample of the present young generation of bands as GNC/WP:BAND will allow.82.166.126.13 (talk) 23:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

82.166.126.13, If you feel that strongly about Louise Distras, then restore her to the 2010 section. May I suggest you add a more significant citation? Her article is also quite thin, as the citations are weak and incorrectly formatted. A Google search turned up mostly mentions in blogs, or listings for tickets or concerts. The reason I suggest this not to make work for you (I assume you have a busy life like the rest of us) but rather so that women are better represented historically in the encyclopedia. I believe we have a common goal in that motive, yes? Netherzone (talk) 06:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I've restored Louise Distras and added the improved assertion of notability which I added to the article recently. I did similar work on The Kut's assertion of notability on their page, so if you're happy with that one, I'll re-add them too. (I should add that Louder Than War very much is a reliable source, as has been discussed on several other talk pages - it is a professionally edited website/print magazine and a significant player in the U.K. music press in the 2010s especially following the demise of the NME's print edition. I would agree however that LTW coverage by itself does not amount to a claim to notability, only one towards the multiple sources required under WP:BAND).

82.166.126.13 (talk) 07:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, 82.166.126.13, it is good to work together on this. Maybe we can both seek out ways to get some of the other bands' articles up to speed so that historically it makes sense moving them to the "decades" sections. My knowledge is primarily from the early decades (as I stated on the talk page some time ago), and you seem to know a lot about more recent decades (and probably early acts as well.) (BTW The Slits were hugely important and infamous long before they were signed.) So we may make a good working team. Let me run something by you, do you agree that the article is still primarily US/UK centric? It would be great see it evolve to good article status (and realize this is not a race, but a process), however I can't imagine this happening without representation from Asia, the Middle East, South America, Eurasia, etc. Would you happen to know editors we could reach out to who might be interested in helping out with this process (and who would find reliable citations whether they are in English or not, as long as they are high quality sources)? Netherzone (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi. The US tag was not my work, we will have to look back and see who did that. I did tag the 2010s section as UK orientated even though this was largely as a result of my own edits, as I felt more content needed to be added to reflect the scenes in other countries (for example the US) where I only have patchy knowledge of current female/female-led bands and that hopefully other editors might be able to step in and add relevant notable acts.82.166.126.13 (talk) 20:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Possible further non-UK band to add - the Barb Wire Dolls82.166.126.13 (talk) 21:57, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Good one. Netherzone (talk) 22:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Also you might like to have a sift through Rebellion Festival#Bands which have performed at the festival for bands which are Wiki-notable, female/female-led and contemporary.82.166.126.13 (talk) 22:58, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Some non-UK possibles - Choking Susan (US), Turbulent Hearts (US), Psychords (Italy) - if we can find the sources. 62.190.148.115 (talk) 13:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

2010s "Other bands"

The following text note has been added to the script for this seciton:
Please read before adding more bands:
Additions to this section should not have their own Wiki article but should have precisely TWO reliable sources (in the case of a UK band, ideally Louder Than War and Vive Le Rock). If a third RS turns up, then that band passes WP:GNC and WP BAND under item #1 re. "multiple, non-trivial, published works" and so should have its own Wikipedia article and its own section. It is hoped that in time additional sources for all these bands will emerge so they can be upgraded to having their own articles.
Hopefully that should make things clear. 2.24.71.140 (talk) 22:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Please clarify how and when was this rule or policy established, and by whom. Netherzone (talk) 02:43, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

WP:BAND option 1, which is an applied reiteration of WP:GNG, states that one criterion by which a musician or band may be notable is if he/she/it "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself'". The crucial word is, of course "multiple" - how many is that? In my general experience of writing claims to notability for bands on Wikipedia, "multiple" means at least three examples.

There are a number of bands of considerable prominence on the current UK punk scene where it can be touch-and-go whether a third example exists and therefore they can have an article (eg Pussycat and the Dirty Johnsons, Hands Off Gretel) or where there are only two examples - therefore it is questionable whether they would pass WP: BAND so as yet no article exists (eg The Soap Girls, Healthy Junkies - redlinks deliberately posted to underline my point.)

(EDITED as Hands Off Gretel now have an article). (P.S. so too now do the Soap Girls.)

The purpose of my original informal list in the text was to cover for just-below-brodlerline-notable acts of comparable prominence to those who do make notability and so provide a clearer overview of the current scene. We do, however, need to establish a threshold to stop the Other bands subsection becoming a free-for-all for clearly non notable bands. Hence my above statement.

This does not (as yet) constitute a binding rule and you, Netherzone, and other Wikipedia users are welcome to discuss and disagree with the above points. It is merely a statement of purpose for the Other bands secion. Ideally one would hope that third sources do show up for these bands and the Other bands section can be done away with, in the end. 62.190.148.115 (talk) 13:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Good idea to work on contextualizing/reducing the Other bands section. Netherzone (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Netherzone for your recent comment on advertising re Louise Distras - in fact I was curious as to how she got to/coincidentally at the top of the list for 2010s artists. Do we want to rethink the order, inclusion, or even alphabetise for fairness? Also what about 2020s artists, should they be in decade started careers or decade where most music created? Rhagfyr (talk) 07:59, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Rhagfyr, thanks for your note. I was wondering about that as well. Maybe there can be a discussion about formatting. All of your questions are relevant. Should everything be alphabetized? Or should the most prominent musicians of the decade be listed first? Are there too many listed? Are there some that can be deleted? Should chronology be determined by when the band began or by when they had public success?

I think if we can hammer out some of these decisions it will improve the article. It's always been a strange hybrid between a "regular" article and a list article. I don't have a problem with that at all, but fine-tuning and standardizing is probably a good thing in relation to article quality. Netherzone (talk) 14:04, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Hands Off Gretel

Further to the above, I've found a third source - inevitably it's the Basingstoke Gazzette I'm at work right now but ASAP I shall create an article for HOG and give them their own section.62.190.148.115 (talk) 16:13, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done Done! 62.190.148.115 (talk) 17:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

January 2020

For now, I am reposting the 2010s Other bands section on here, pending further discussion. I think it should be restored as these are bands of comparable prominence on the scene to the ones on the list except that they do not have quite enough references for an article (two, whereas three seems to be the magic number to satisfy WP:BAND "mutliple independent sources." One of these bands, The Soap Girls, has recently got a third source (a piece in Planet Rock magazine) and I am planning to do a starter article on them soon using my login. Romomusicfan (talk) 09:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Other artists

Other prominent female or female-fronted acts on the 2010s punk scene included Maid of Ace, Healthy Junkies, dragSTER, the Soap Girls. IDestroy and Cryptic Street.

Romomusicfan (talk) 09:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

References

in reply to protection page

Just to keep it brief as I'm trying to get my job done right now:
1) Up until now I assumed there was no issue with the 2010s section as we'd sorted it a year ago,
2) If you want the length of the entries trimmed back a bit that's okay with me. I just reproduced the claims to notability from the original pages.
3) I don't understand why Puss Johnson was singled out for complete blanking (and since you only said you were clearing up in the note, I'll assume that was just an error on your past until/unless you state otherwise.)
4) As stated above I think the Other Bands section should stay as pretty much all the mentioned acts on the full section are of comparable significance on the 2010s punk scene to each other, but it's touch and go whether some have enough refs for an article and others do not. I now have enough refs to do a Soap Girls article and viscerally I believe there should be articles on Maid Of Ace, Healthy Junkies and dragSTER if only I could find a third darn source for each.
5) Okay I'l keep using the login until we've got this sorted. Romomusicfan (talk) 14:24, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for helping to recreate the 2010 section Romomusicfan, I stripped it down when cleaning up all the overlinking by a disruptive IP. Is it possible for you to stay logged in, as it is confusing to try to keep track of multiple IP addresses, and better for communication, IMO. Do you agree that references/citations should include the author, title, URL + access date, publication name (not wikilinked) and date if available? Netherzone (talk) 14:18, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm fine with that (except possibly for print publication refs where URL/acc date is obviously not applicable) and as you recall from last year, I did do a lot of work on getting the references sorted properly on the various entries. Okay I did have to be reminded a bit to get it done, but I did 'em in the end.Romomusicfan (talk) 14:34, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, Romomusicfan I am happy to work with you to get this sorted out. In response to the above list, 1) I think the quality of the article will be improved if the focus is content about the artist in relation their music, with complete citations with authors name and publication, (rather than bare refs) etc. 2) The issue is not length. How about if each artist has two citations from diverse reliable sources. 3) Not singling out. Please add it back, I was struggling with cleaning up some of the overlinking that the disruptive IP embedded inside some of the references in the article. It took a lot of my time to clean up the the mess - sorry if I undid some of your work, but it's hard for me to keep track of the various IP numbers you use. I'm sure you understand. 4) Add the section back, however, I thought we can agreed that other artists should have their own article? Two good reliable sources is absolutely fine - things don't have to be overly referenced. In general, after cleaning up the mess left by the disruptive IP, the 2010's section seemed promotional rather than content driven. Netherzone (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

As discussed, I've done an article on The Soap Girls so they get a section, and I've restored Other Artists minus the SGs.Romomusicfan (talk) 23:44, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks and again sorry to make extra work for you after I cleaned up after the "Phantom Overlinker." Onward into 2020! Netherzone (talk) 16:12, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Healthy Junkies

They now have a Wikipedia article so I have created a section for Nina Courson, modelled on the Puss Johnson section.Romomusicfan (talk) 08:53, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Maid of Ace

They now have a Wikipedia article so I have created a section for them, modelled on the Healthy Junkies section.Romomusicfan (talk) 09:10, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

List of other women punk musicians

I suggest that this list should be broken down into decades and each decade's list appended to that decade's section. 2.24.71.140 (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

I concur, this is a good idea that will improve the page. Netherzone (talk) 20:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done Done! 62.190.148.115 (talk) 18:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

You are awesome! Netherzone (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Citation/Reference issues Comment

There have been quite a few references/citations added recently that are not the WP:MOS-REF suggested formats/guidelines for best practices. Please see Citing_sources for more information on how to format referencing citations. Guidelines indicate that each article should use one consistent style. Historically, this article used full citations whenever possible. It is important that enough information is provided in each citation to identify the source. Netherzone (talk) 15:15, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for this message and the message on my talkpage. Please bear in mind that many editors have limited time to make edits and have to get their editing done in a hurry, often on the sly in the workplace.62.190.148.115 (talk) 08:52, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

We have a common interest in improving this article and representing women's history. Please bear in mind that other editors will have to clean up these bare citations, and that they also have busy lives, jobs, families and limited time to make edits. I'm not sure what is meant by "often on the sly in the workplace" however, that sounds like your personal choice and should not affect the quality of the article. Here is some information from the Wikipedia content guidelines WP:CS, please review it:

Each article should use one citation method or style throughout. If an article already has citations, preserve consistency by using that method or seek consensus on the talk page before changing it (the principle is reviewed at § Variation in citation methods). While you should try to write citations correctly, what matters most is that you provide enough information to identify the source.

I'm requesting that you kindly keep the citations consistent. Here is the Wikipedia guideline on web citations WP:CITEWEB, it will be appreciated if this style is used: Citations for World Wide Web pages typically include:

• URL of the web page – that is the URL of the web page where the referenced content can be found, not, e.g., the main page of a website when the content is on a subpage of that website (see Wikipedia:Shallow references)
• name of the author(s)
• title of the article within quotation marks
• translated title of the article in square brackets after the title if not in English
• title or domain name of the website
• publisher, if known
• date of publication
• page number(s) (if applicable)
• the date you retrieved (or accessed) the web page (required if the publication date is unknown)
  Netherzone (talk) 01:08, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I have now filled out the bare references for Cryptic Street and Doll Skin and will in due course get the references for Hands Off Gretel, Pussycat and the Dirty Johnson, the Kut etc sorted out as soon as I get another spare moment. Which was the point I was making - a user is faced with the choice of either getting a proposed edit down on (virtual) paper in the heat of the moment and sorting out the mess later or else waiting for a whole big long spare afternoon which may not come. I personally prefer to strike while the iron is hot, although I am more than prepared to sort things out afterwards. An article which needs to be brought up to MOS standards is- in the short term - a lesser ill than an article that is just simply missing essential content. However I agree that MOS has to be adhered to in the long run and will be back very soon to take care of the rest. 62.190.148.115 (talk) 15:18, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions. The bare URLs are subject to link rot which is also reason they need to be cleaned up. Having the access dates in there also can help with this in the future. Netherzone (talk) 21:54, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome. Have now sorted out the bare refs for all the other URLS on the bits I worked on. I guess in a nutshell what I was trying to say above was "Have patience!" Well it's dealt with now. 2.28.124.127 (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Cool, patience, yes. Thanks so much. Netherzone (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Possible oversights

In the 1970s, Belinda Carlisle (as Dottie Danger) was an original member of The Germs and The Go-Go's are on the main punk rock page as part of the second wave. Pauline Murray seems underappreciated as just "other artists". --SVTCobra (talk) 02:03, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for calling attention to these oversights, SVTCobra. Please add them to the article if you find a moment, and I will also put it on my "to do" list as well. Cheers, Netherzone (talk) 05:03, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Subheadings and Details in Social Change portion

The subheadings I had in the Social Change section were removed. I think they were valuable there because it adds structure and helps to differentiate between unique themes in both the music and subculture. I would also like to keep in details where I drew a parallel between female punk figures (Patti Smith) and more classic female figures in music (The Ronettes). I think the comparison of the sexualization that these women faced is a testimony to the unique challenges that women in this type of music experience. As women who are present in a historically male-dominated music genre, the sexualization and belittling they often face I think is an important sociological occurrence that is a relevant theme and topic in songs of some female punk musicians. I feel it is important to note, and I feel the comparison helps support the section with a historical connection to demonstrate an ongoing struggle of women in music, and particularly in rock and punk music which are male-dominated.Hheasley (talk) 23:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Hheasley, welcome to Wikipedia! I've moved your comment to the correct location on this talk page - newer comments always get added to the bottom of the page so that the talk page is in chronological order. Glad to know you are interested in women in punk rock. I am the editor who performed edits to the subheadings and some of the content you added. My objective was to keep balance within the article. Let me explain my rationale: firstly the subheadings did not follow the style format for the overall article, as per Wikipedia's Manual of Style WP:MOS. Policy states that "it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change." The section you added was it's own mini-article within the article. It seemed like a "sociology of gender" essay or "sociology of music" essay embedded within the article, and it was much too long for an article with a focus on bands and musicians. In other words, it had undue weight, see WP:UNDUE which does not support the standard for neutral point of view we strive for here (see WP:NPOV). It was unclear how much was original research WP:NOR which is to be avoided. Lastly it had somewhat of a soapbox flavor of an opinion piece, see WP:SOAPBOX. The section is now more concise, is not too redundant with the History section, and and sized more appropriately for an article that focuses on the women musicians themselves. Netherzone (talk) 04:35, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Oh, so you're the one responsible for the quasi-Marxist agitprop on here. Weird that anyone would think punk isn't a form rock, when one is clearly a subgenre of the other, sped up and simplified. And free of pseudointellectual pretension like prog (hint hint). -2A01:4C8:1482:6250:1:1:BDC4:AD1 (talk) 17:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Garbage claims

This article has a lot of garbage claims in it, such as implying most punks are Communists (like the §SWP front "Rock against Sexism) -2A01:4C8:1482:6250:1:1:BDC4:AD1 (talk) 17:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

(1) Implying and claiming are two different things.

(2) Generally punks went along with RAR and RAS until the facades were dropped and they came out as being the SWP, at which point people distanced themselves from the SWP. Mch like BLM, many people agreed with the basic principle but not every details of the party line.Romomusicfan (talk) 17:09, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

... or anarchists (and probably wanted the rest in re-education gulags or liquidated). That's garbage as in trash, not Shirley Manson. One of just a few examples of prime garbage from a far left culture critic right here:

"[s]inging was sometimes an acceptable pastime for a girl, but playing an instrument...simply wasn't done."

Yet in real life, as opposed to the propaganda there were quite a few women instrumentalists in the mainstream before punk emerged - one example was the drummer Karen Carpenter who was massive in the early seventies and another would be country musician Dolly Parton who was a multi-instrumentalist. Neither of these women were punks of course, but they were around before punk, and were extremely high profile. Going back even earlier you had Nina Simone and popular classical performers like Jacqueline Du Pré (whose career ended before true punk)... These are just high profile examples off the top of my head, but there are many others.2A01:4C8:1482:6250:1:1:BDC4:AD1 (talk) 17:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

I would suggest the article should be slightly more specific and state that it was ROCK music in particular in which this issue existed. It is worth considering how often when an occasional female rock musician (other than a vocalist with no creative vote in the band) emerged, she would be quickly shunted off into another genre - eg Wanda Jackson was "persuaded" to move into country, Bonnie Raitt was classed as a blues rather than rock guitarist, etc.Romomusicfan (talk) 17:09, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done Have changed this to "rock music" Romomusicfan (talk) 17:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I suppose if someone repeats a victim message people will believe it, especially from some "academic". Thing is that early female punk would never have emerged if they'd all acted the victim.-2A01:4C8:1482:6250:1:1:BDC4:AD1 (talk) 17:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Hello IP, thanks for your interest in Women in Punk Rock. I'm pinging CorbieVreccan as if I'm remembering correctly, they are the editor that added some content improvements about Rock Against Sexism, but I don't know that they are the editor who added the sentence you object to. Do you have another wording to suggest? Interesting news about "garbage claims" or communists in relation to this subject, and the victim academic thing -- that's an original way of describing garbage. Is that your personal take or are there references? Mentioning Carpenter, Parton, Simon or DuPré seems irrelevant to this article but maybe it would would make more sense, maybe here: Women in music. Netherzone (talk) 21:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Not irrelevant at all. The article says women weren't known as instrumentalists in popular music before punk came along, which is a blatant untruth.

Rock against Sexism was a spinoff of the Red Wedge movement, which was a Communist front group (hence the name),2A01:4C8:1482:6250:1:1:BDC4:AD1 (talk) 22:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Untrue. Red Wedge was a later (mid 1980s) campaign in support of election of the Labour Party (UK). Neil Kinnock's appearance in a video by Tracey Ullman was a part of their campaign.Romomusicfan (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

which used various non-members to promote its message. This article is way too sympathetic towards the extreme left, when in fact a significant number of punks weren't sympathetic towards it. (In the early days, punks were as likely to be Fascistic or apolitical or anarchist, or at least moderate left but history has been rewritten to exclude that.)-2A01:4C8:1482:6250:1:1:BDC4:AD1 (talk) 22:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

"punks were as likely to be Fascistic"

Misleading claim. Apart from a few isolated fringe scenes such as at the Swinging Apple pub in Liverpool, punks were generally ill-disposed towards the totalitarian right wing and the feeling was mutual. The tag of being Fascist sympathisers was falsely - and maliciously - applied to some punk bands like Siouxsie and the Banshees and Adam and the Ants who used the imagery of the Third Reich either provocatively or else as a form of taboo breaking not disimilar to that employed by Lenny Bruce or Mel Brooks circa The Producers (to wit the main musical number Springtime For Hitler in the latter). In his own crude way that is also what Sid Vicious was doing with his own use of the swastika. Liberal-baiting is not necessarily fascistic nor even necessarily right wing.

For what it's worth, actual far right wing organisations such as the National Front and the British National Party remained vehemently anti punk until gradually cottoning on to the potential for a right wing rock movement during the early 1980s Oi! movement.2.24.70.193 (talk) 22:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

(The above post by IP 2.24.70.193 was written by myself.Romomusicfan (talk) 09:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

No, I did not opine about Communism herein. RAS was not a "Communist front group" in any of the iterations I knew it in, and AFAIR is not described as such in any of the sources I added. RAS groups hosted many different events, internationally, over the decades, including ad hoc concerts for political issues. Artists and activists associated with RAS had a range of political beliefs. Most were leftist and radical, and I don't doubt a number considered themselves Communists, but the groups I'm most familiar with had no official party affiliations. If you look at the logos many adopted, they include the Anarchist circle-A logo - which could mean radically different things to different groups and individuals.

Anyway, our opinions on this don't matter that much, IP. What matters are the WP:RS sources. And I agree with Netherzone - Women in music is the place for pioneering women musicians of other genres. This article is for punk rock. Though some would enjoy a spirited debate on the topic, I think most would agree that "Punk rock" is determined by music style, not political party. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 18:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Too many subsections or "significant" artists

I find the "Significant artists" section either messy or cluttered with numerous subsections. I think merging them would be the right away forward. --George Ho (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I disagree. I think particularly with the 2010s and particularly in the UK, the young generation of all-female/mostly female/female fronted bands affiliated to the punk scene has become an important cultural force and significant development in guitar rock in its own right. It's only a pity that the demise of the traditional music press has meant that there has been no properly documented effort to define this trend, give it a name etc, otherwise the phenomenon would surely be a candidate for a Wikipedia article in its own right.Romomusicfan (talk) 02:18, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps a spin off article "Women in punk rock in the United Kingdom in the 2010s" would be a goer. The lede might have to be expanded otherwise most of the content could be transferred from this article.Romomusicfan (talk) 11:11, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

I too disagree, George. If anything, developing these sections would be an improvement. Then perhaps as @Romomusicfan suggests, some decades could be developed and spun off into their own separate articles. This could start with the 2010s as suggested, "Women in punk in the UK in the x-decade", etc.. Romo, you are much more familiar with that particular period in the UK than I, and have a wealth of knowledge. (I'm more focused on early punk in the US, but I'd help out with this project for sure.) Netherzone (talk) 14:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I'd really love there to be a Wikipedia article on 2010s UK female-led punk bands/"the Steve Iles bands"/Stepunker Rock/call it what you like but nobody has written a proper source defining describing that scene as a whole. Indeed it doesn't have a proper name or any definition as a scene other than as a vague subsection of the UK punk scene in the 21st century. The best source we have to demonstrate its existence is that Nina Courson quote from Vive Le Rock. I'm not sure if it could be set up as a WP:SETINDEX list article (like Kendo Nagasaki) which would not require too much of a new lede to be created, just use the existing sublede for the 2010s section.Romomusicfan (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Maybe start a list somewhere of verifiable sources to get the ball rolling on a new article? That could be linked here, or in a user sub-page somewhere (with the link shared here). The SETNDEX could be a way to start, or even a simple list article as long as there are three solid sources. If you would love to see the article, why not give it a shot? I'd help out, though it's not my main area of interest. You have a depth of knowledge to draw on. If you'd like me to start a sandbox as with G.B. I'm happy to do that. Netherzone (talk) 15:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I've put down the gist of what I am suggesting at User:Romomusicfan/sandbox and I'll do some more work on it later. How did you generate a separate sandbox like you did for Georgina Baillie? I want to do the same with this.Romomusicfan (talk) 15:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Romomusicfan - Create a user subpage called User:Romomusicfan/sandbox/2010s UK female-led punk bands (or whatever you want to call it....UK female-led punk bands in the 2010s or...) Type that string into the search field, and it will take you to a page where it asks if you want to start the page ..... (You can also just click on the redlink above instead). You can create user subpages for several different projects-in-progress. To find your various subpages, click on "user contributions" on the left side bar when you are on your main user page or talk page; scroll to the bottom, and click on "subpages" or simply keep a copy of the link. Netherzone (talk) 15:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Romomusicfan/sandbox/Women_in_Punk_Rock_in_the_United_Kingdom_in_the_21st_Century Romomusicfan (talk) 17:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

You two disagree with me? That's... I can't say whether that's "surprising" or "hardly surprising". I still think subsections of individuals are concerning. Indeed, women in music, women in jazz, women in rock, and women in Latin music don't have subsections of individual figures to this date. If names are mentioned, then they are part of lists, not subsections. If those articles aren't convincing, then... I don't know what else to tell you. George Ho (talk) 09:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello @George Ho. Yes I do disagree, respectfully of course, and it sounds like @Romomusicfan also disagrees. I'm assuming you did not mean for this: You two disagree with me? That's... I can't say whether that's "surprising" or "hardly surprising" to sound a little like a put-down. Nevertheless, thank you kindly for offering your thoughts. There is consensus at this time that the decade-by-decade structure is not problematic even though it may "look messy" to you. I guess "messiness" is in the eye of the beholder; the current structure is easy to navigate and concise. It allows the readership to zero-in on a decade and identify key notable artists within a historical framework. Netherzone (talk) 15:27, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I do agree with Netherzone on the issue of examples, although I would like to spin off the 2010s section into its own article if only I could find enough sources to clearly define the subject as it's something which could really do with its own article as a particular wave of young demale-led bands affiliated to the punk scene (if not actually playing punk rock necessarily). It's a demographic trend, not a genre and we no longer have the kind of music press we once had who would give names to this sort of thing, so there isn't really a name for the phenonmena, but I've got the substance of an article together in my sandbox. Until then, it will have to exist as a subsection of this article.

. (@ Netherzone please do give feedback on the template I linked to above.Romomusicfan (talk) 17:47, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Will do! Netherzone (talk) 20:05, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Romomusicfan - the next three days are really busy for me, so I will have a deeper look on the weekend. I didn't check each source yet, but I think the article will have a better chance as a stand-alone if some of the sources actually say: Women in Punk Rock in the United Kingdom in the 21st Century. I would not be surprised if there are chapters in some recent books or journal articles that use this phrase. If you come up blank, I'll ping another editor who told me his daughter just wrote her dissertation on women in punk rock. He seems to be on a wiki-break right now, but am thinking they may also have some thoughts. Cheers, Netherzone (talk) 20:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

It's basically a piece on a relatively recent scene/generation of bands and musicians operating in a time after the collapse of the conventional music press who in the past would have given them a name/label and boundaries (which makes it easier to write articles on earlier scenes).Romomusicfan (talk) 10:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikilinks to 2010s section of this article

Am posting these to show how the 2010s section serves as an article within an article for the current young mostly female generation of bands on the UK scene and hence the importance of the numberous examples.

• 2010s in music#Rock 2 - "A grassroots punk scene continued in the UK, mainly built around the hub of the annual Rebellion Festival in Blackpool. The 2010s saw a particular profusion of younger female or female-fronted bands affiliated to the punk scene."
  
• Music of the United Kingdom (2000s and 2010s)#Punk - (Identical text to above example.)

(There may be some others elsewhere) Romomusicfan (talk) 14:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Romomusicfan your idea for a new article on 2010s is a good one, and is a historical range you are very familiar with. It makes sense, and it looks like there's plenty of sourcing already in the draft. When I come up for air this weekend (I'm back full-time at my job this week) I'll look into some book sources and also see what might be out there in academic journal articles. A very quick Google Books search this morning turned up these possibilites: in Vivien Goldman's 2019 book Revenge of the She-Punks: A Feminist Music History from Poly Styrene to Pussy Riot there are a few mentions of the 2010s.[2]; Lisa Robinson's 2020 book Nobody Ever Asked Me about the Girls: Women, Music and Fame also turned up info on 2010s [3]; Helen Reddington's book The Lost Women of Rock Music: Female Musicians of the Punk Era is also a possibility (but its focus is mainly earlier) however it is a really solid reference. [4]. On JSTOR I found this from 2014: Fight back: Punk, politics and resistance [5] - haven't looked through it yet, but I do have access to JSTOR; I'll get to it this weekend, and will do some deeper searching. Netherzone (talk) 15:39, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment about knowledge about the era, it's mostly a simple matter of keeping up with the current scene here in the UK - a mixture of gig-going and following Youtube channels keeps a music fan up to date with the current hip bands today.Romomusicfan (talk) 17:51, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Here's a few more possibilites for references to the 2010 era - these may be behind a paywall, however I can download from EBSCO if you are not able to access. Will give them a read soon. The persistence of punk rock : a statistical network analysis of underground punk worlds in Manchester and Liverpool, 2013-2015 [6]; The Expansion of Punk Rock: Riot Grrrl Challenges to Gender Power Relations in British Indie Music Subcultures [7]; Typical Girls?: Fuck Off, You Wanker! Re-Evaluating the Slits and Gender Relations in Early British Punk and Post-Punk [8]. Netherzone (talk) 17:56, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

I was talking to friends/musicians about the idea of doing an in person edit-a-thon somewhere in London with good Women in rock books (had a look at a few libraries but shockingly only maybe the BL does have a good selection), not sure if I'm going to get round to that anytime soon.... but... on the note of a bibliography of sorts the above list is really useful, could we collate them together into a Google Sheet perhaps (or is there a precedent for similar Wikiprojects?). Would be useful to link to 'full work available at Internet Archive' etc or user x has this book at home, as per the very useful Reference Desk space on Wikipedia (we could also ask for help at I bet!). Anyway, a google sheet? Or similar?

cc @Lewishhh who was keen on this too ! Rhagfyr (talk) 22:40, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I think your idea is an excellent one, but think it should be located onwiki. I think what's better than a Google Sheet, which may open up a can of worms re: privacy, is to start a "Further reading" section after the "References" section. There's sort of a standard format for that, Wikipedia:Further reading. Another idea is for someone to volunteer to host a User subpage in their user space and share the link with others. Another reason I think it's best to host on wiki is that it may attract editors from other continents. It's problematic that the article is so focused on the UK and the US. And altho those two cultures have made wonderful contributions, so have women in other areas of the world. Netherzone (talk) 23:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Too UK and US centric

I've done some work in the past to try to globalize the article, but it is still way too UK and US centric, and does not fully represent the world. Following up on some of the questions above presented by @Rhagfyr re: the 2010s, I suggest that several of the bands/people in the decade-by-decate short entries be moved to the "other artists" lists. Other thoughts are to get rid of these entirely, and have sub-sections by continent, North America, Europe, Asia, Oceana, South America, and consolidate into prose form. Thoughts? Netherzone (talk) 15:45, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Is there any precedent in other genre articles for being split up internationally like this? Would be useful to have something to copy. I agree it would be excellent to globalise the article though we will likely need wider non-Western sources. Notable bands that come instantly to mind include Rakta (Brazil)[9][10] and Sial (Singapore)[11][12]. Decolonise Fest (also prob needs its own article as multiple WP mentions) in the UK probably a good place to look at past line ups and similar events internationally. Rhagfyr (talk) 22:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Please add Rakta and Sial, the sourcing looks fine. Netherzone (talk) 00:04, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't know if there is a precedent (for geographic sub-sections), it was just an idea that popped into my head. I'll look around to see if I can find any other models that could be followed. Netherzone (talk) 00:15, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

If and when enough sources emerge for me to publish my proposed splinter page for the C21st UK wave/scene of bands (at the moment all there is for the overall scene is that one Nina Courson interview quote) I will reduce all the linked UK 2010s bands down into a smaller subsection under whatever name the sources decide to give that scene/wave.22:12, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposed split

This article has been built as two different things: an informative page explaining the situation of women in punk music, and a list of punk women. I propose we split out the non-prose entries to create a stand-alone list article of women in punk. Netherzone and George Ho have suggested similar strategies on this talk page.

The problem with combining the two trains of thought is that the many non-prose bulleted entries are a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE in a regular prose article, but they are perfectly fine in a list article. The regular article should only discuss those women who have been described as influential to punk rock. The list article is more inclusive, encompassing everybody who is notable.

Let's move a bunch of names to List of women in punk rock. Thoughts? Binksternet (talk) 22:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry but I did not suggest what you are proposing or saying I suggested. I totally disagree with you on this matter, Binksternet. I think the article is perfectly fine as it is and has been relatively stable since I created it, and have kept it pretty much spam free since then. With due respect, there is no need to fix what is not broken. Netherzone (talk) 23:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:INDISCRIMINATE says, "data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources." Bare lists of names are in violation of this. All of the non-prose entries should be removed from this article, as they have no context or explanation.

Basically, if the entry is not important to the topic, it should be removed. INDISCRIMINATE says, "merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." Binksternet (talk) 23:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

@Binksternet So this whole controversy is because someone you didn't approve of editing your personal article? ??

What grounds did you have for removing the other editors entry about The Linda Linda's? The comments I saw in the edit history sound like you are scolding them, not justifying why you should immediately delete someone else's edits.

I don't think that is how things work around Wikipedia.

Doesn't it say "If you don't want someone else editing your page don't put it on Wikipedia" ? 2601:447:CD7E:7CF0:A007:1E54:B9C:446B (talk) 08:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC) (This is User:DrKC MD editing logged out. Binksternet (talk) 04:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)}

Actually, "this" is me taking a long look at the article, and making an assessment based on years of editing. "This" is me proposing a fix for the problems I observed. Binksternet (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Any objection to creation of an entry for 2020s

I entered a section for the 2020s and put an entry about the Linda Lindas in it. Someone keeps deleting it claiming that they are not significant enough, in spite of them meeting WP's criteria. Does anyone take exception with inclusion of this admittedly young band, who have been so widely praised and who have had a major influence? I am asking that anyone who thinks that having multiple stories in NY Times, Variety, Rolling Stone, and NPR should be excluded from the existing WP significance criteria.

• Also, should individual editors be removing bands just because they don't know who they are? I don't think that it is a particularly useful critiera. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrKC MD (talk • contribs) 00:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

We seem to be far enough into the 2020s to acknowledge it as an actual occurrence, esp. with a band that has been around for five years. Given the sources mentioned it is rather silly for the person who created this page to argue that any thing new is spam. 2601:447:CD7E:7CF0:0:0:0:56AE (talk) 02:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC) (This is User:DrKC MD editing logged out. Binksternet (talk) 04:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)}

WP Criteria for inclusion

To be considered significant by WP, a band must meet some threshold of notability:

Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.

Any of the following would have met this criteria for inclusion. Even if you get your music information from obscure sources, it is hard to fathom how anyone with an ounce of insight into the scene of women in punk these days would object.

"'Whoa, this is crazy': L.A. teen punks the Linda Lindas on going viral (just before finals)". Los Angeles Times. 23 May 2021. Retrieved 8 April 2024. Rascoe, Ayesha (9 March 2022). "Punk Rock's New Hope: The Ferocious, Joyful Linda Lindas". The New York Times. Retrieved 6 April 2024. Paul, Larisha (10 April 2023). "The Linda Lindas Return Recharged and Enlightened on 'Too Many Things'". Rolling Stone. Retrieved 6 April 2024. Weekend Edition Sunday (17 April 2022). "On full-length debut, viral punk band The Linda Lindas keep growing". National Public Radio. Trakin, Roy (9 April 2022). "The Linda Lindas Are 'Growing Up' in Public in Teen Punk Band's Full-Length Debut: Album Review". Variety. Retrieved 6 April 2024. Chan, Anna (16 May 2022). "20 Questions With The Linda Lindas: Teen Punk Rockers Talk Asian Representation in Music, 'Growing Up' & More". Billboard. Retrieved 8 April 2024. Bosselman, Haley (21 May 2021). "The Linda Lindas' Library Performance of 'Racist, Sexist Boy' Hailed by Rage Against the Machine's Tom Morello". Variety. Retrieved 6 April 2024. "L.A. teen band's song 'Racist Sexist Boy' goes viral". NBC News. 21 May 2021. Retrieved 6 April 2024. Dunlea, Reed (4 June 2021). "'The First Time' With the Linda Lindas on 'Racist, Sexist Boy' and DIY Punk". Rolling Stone. Retrieved 6 April 2024. Levin, Sam (24 May 2021). "The Linda Lindas on their viral song Racist, Sexist Boy: 'It's good to let the anger out and scream'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 6 April 2024.

Also, it is impossible to argue that they have not become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city. It isn't just LA, by the way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrKC MD (talk • contribs)

References

That guideline is more for articles, but can be applicable here i suppose. I'm unsure, it may be a little early for a '20s section. Given the disagreement, it may be worth a request for comment to generate a more firm consensus. At the minimum, I would solicit opinions from editors in the various wikiprojects listed on this talk page. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 20:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Seems like multiple mentions in major publications talking about the controversy as well as reviewing the music says they are of historic importance, as well as currently relevant. Where does this requirement for years and years of history come from, as no other articles seem to use it as a criteria.

@Aunva6 2601:447:CD7E:7CF0:A007:1E54:B9C:446B (talk) 08:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC) (This is User:DrKC MD editing logged out. Binksternet (talk) 04:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)}

There is more specific discusssion Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists, Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Lists of people, and Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines, but in particular Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#Adding individual items to a list. In particular: "Content coverage within a given article or list (i.e. whether something is noteworthy enough to be mentioned within the article or list) is governed by the principle of due weight, balance, and other content policies." (e.g. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#Adding individual items to a list and Wikipedia:SIGCOV).

I think the question still remains as to the single editors claim, based on an in-line HTML/XML comment at the tope of the article (I.e. not at all part of the actual content of the article nor does it meet the established editorial criteria for selection. However, even if we are to assume that the there is any face validity to the hidden comments, they still support the inclusion of the Linda Lindas. If you missed the hidden requirements, the are:

<code><!--This article is to include only female punk musicians that have articles and that are properly cited - SIGCOV in at least two or three reliable sources. The "featured" artists are those who are heavy hitters with careers several decades long or are widely known internationally and their genre is primarily punk rock, not pop punk not grunge, not alternative rock, etc. No red links, all artists must have a main article. If their career is shorter or they are lesser known, they might belong in the "Other artists" subsections. No redlinks in this subsection either. This article is NOT a list article, therefore it cannot support listing every single woman punk artist that has ever existed.--></code>

I don't know what sort of criteria one might use to determine if someone was widely known internationally. Maybe coverage in major media publications with international readership/scope? E.g. Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Rolling Stone, Weekend Edition Sunday NPR, Variety.Billboard. and if there was any double, I would suggest you read the article in The Guardian'' "The Linda Lindas on their viral song Racist, Sexist Boy: 'It's good to let the anger out and scream'" as it not only clearly indicates that they have been receiving inerational attention (totally seperate from coverage of the their tour schedule and record release--this is about the lastinig legacy they have already established. (The Guardian is a British daily newspaper. It was founded in 1821. It seems to think there is something to them too. Or maybe its just Carrie Brownstein talking....). I would really ecourage that people review the articles (OK, the Carrie Brownstein interview isn't terribly hard hitting journalism, but I think you get the point that if one of the leads of Sleater-Kinney of gushes "I’m so glad you guys exist!" that maybe the objections to their inclusion on this list are rather silly . If you finished the list I provided that should have settled this devate a long time ago, there is no shortage of coverage that makes it very clear that even this hidden double-secret criteria is easily met. " After being catapulted to international attention last year, the teen/tween LA band prove they've got more than just potential on their debut album." I suppose I am trusting too much in the judgement of Bikini Kill (who they toured with in 2019) and they are now on tour with Greenday--who might not be your sort of punk, but I suspect they get their pick of who to tour with these days. Sure, it may just be that Mila and Lucia's dad (and Eloise's uncle) is Carlos de la Garza, but the reality is that they have been hitting above their weight class for 5 years now. How many highschool bands do you know who played Coachella, or Lollapalooza? Opened for the Bratmobile reunion? Are selling out huge venues on their own? They continue to put out new albums and singles . If they were half as famous they would still far exceed the criteria to be on a list of Women in Punk. They are far more than a footnote in the history of punk already, and I have not heard any sort of cogent argement (double secret critiera included) why they would not belong on this list. I am going to accept they if are good enough for Bratmobile, Sleater-Kinney, and Bikini-Kill to treat as their peers then they really do fit this list. Given the total absense of a substatiative reason, they should have been returned per Wikipedia:Speedy keep criteria. DrKC MD (talk) 06:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)