Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Emo

MfD Result Notice

This page was the subject of an MfD debate closed on 2 October 2006. The result was keep. Xoloz 15:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Iceness 17:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Is this project really a good idea? Even the article on Emo (music) says "use of the term has been the subject of much debate." And there's already Wikipedia:WikiProject Punk music. WikiProject's aren't clubs.. unless an emo- specific project can really add something that isn't a violation of NPOV and OR.. I'd say this isn't the best idea for a WikiProject. -- Ned Scott 09:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

-- The "use of the term has been the subject of much debate" is exactly the reason of starting the project - to draw the line for the genre nobody has any idea about. Wiki article on emo doesn't give any definition of what emo music is, and wiki project on punk doesn't even have emo as it's sub-genre. Iceness 25 Sept, 2006

Yeah, but that's considered original research. -- Ned Scott 00:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes but, "Like most Wikipedia policies, No original research applies to articles, not to talk pages or project pages" . Iceness 25 Sept, 2006

However, the rule regarding NPOV applies anywhere. And, if there is no existing agreed-upon definition of the term, then any attempt to define it would by definition qualify as being an attempt to establish one point of view on the matter. I strongly recommend rethinking the project page. Badbilltucker 23:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

No it doesn't. NPOV applies to articles only. The whole reason talk pages are there is so that people can share their POV. Also, just because we want to come to a conclusion on what Emo IS, doesn't mean to say that we're dictating what Emo is. There is a difference between the two.

As for Ned's comments, nobody ever said that this project was a "club", there are serious aims behind this project and I'd thank you not to attempt to cheapen them by making such derogatory accusations. Despite what you seem to think, the existance of the punk project doesn't, hasn't, and never will solved any disputes over Emo, ever, nor does it's existance negate the legitimacy of this project, so perhaps you'd care to study the situation more carefully before making a judgement. The aim of this project as I am given to understand it, is to provide a means of dealing with the disputed nature of Emo on wikipedia, by tackling each issue on an individual basis and reaching a consensus on that issue - hopefully some of what is achieved here can go on to be policy. I see nothing objectionable about reaching a consensus on the issues surrounding any subject, let alone emo, and I find it strange that you do. For some reason Ned, you seem determined to end this project, and I'd wager that you've got a personal agenda. Right or wrong, I feel I must remind you that unless you really have a reason to say something (like if you've actually come across something you object to, something that you could cite if need be), you should generally keep it to yourself.▫Bad▫harlick♠ 06:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Project name

Can we please move this to Wikipedia:WikiProject Emo music? I think it would make much more sense. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 12:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

If it's posible to re-direct, then yes. I think I just didn't notice I didn't add "Music" to the project title when I started it. Can you do it? Iceness 13:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 15:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks - less confusion now. Iceness 16:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Updates To Positive Factors Sub-Article

I've used four sources to start classifying Emo music by what it consists of - I've attached reference link to each factor I've listed in here. Any feedback? I didn't copy/paste exactly word-by-word from the mentioned web-sites, rather summed up with my own phrases. Iceness 16:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
• User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
• User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
• User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

This project is legit

Following on from a previous discussion, I would like to propose that we make it clear that wasting our time, or attempting to have this project removed, by arguing the validity of the project will not be tolerated. The improvement of articles on Wikipedia does not involve attempting to end projects just because you dislike them for no apparent (or given) reason. Therefore I suggest we compose a charter or statement, to make it clear what our mission is, and why we're here. In it we should cite the MfD keep vote as proof that there is a consensus on the validity of this project.--▫Bad▫harlick♠ 06:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Emo subgenres

Hi. This is to request that members of this project look at Emo (music) and Hardcore emo and, if they really are different genres, try to rephrase the introductions etc to make it clear what the relationship is between them.

As it stands, the articles are candidates for a merge IMO, but not so clearly that I'd be confident to propose it. But that's another option.

There's also been a proposal to rename Hardcore emo to Emocore, but the proposal was not properly made or justified and attracted no support that I can see. Emocore appears to me to be a neologism, but if that's wrong we can open a proper discussion on this proposed move, and I'd be glad to help. Andrewa 14:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

New Userbox?

Hello,Just wondering,do you think that we need a new user box for this Project? I just thought about this because I was looking at the project page and it seems like the picture on the userbox is not showing-up. Please tell me what you think we should do. Musicfreak84 22:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Punk Rock

Somebody requested on the punk rock talk page that someone write a (really well-cited) paragraph about Emo for that article. Does anyone here want to do that? P4k 19:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

emo is a subgenre of punk not hardcore

straightedge, posi, power violence, etc. are all subgenres of hardcore. emo may have come out of the hardcore scene i.e. the first bands were from people who had been in hardcore bands but that doesnt mean its a subgenre of it. Embrace could not sound any further from Minor Threat. now technically bands like Mohinder, Heroin, Iconoclast, etc. are hardcore-emo which is actually a subgenre of both hardcore and emo but these bands came way too long after the fact to open up the main emo article stating thats its a subgenre of hardcore. Consistently people say that its a part of hardcore as a reaction to people talking about how "gay" emo is. so the reaction is "no way man its HARDCORE or of course EMOTIVE hardcore." invariably its their defense. thats why this description is so popular, not because its grounded in fact.

hardcore emo is a subgenre of both emo and hardcore. emo is a subgenre of punk —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Androol (talk • contribs) 05:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC).

octave chords

do you people not actually know anything at all about emo which has been locked from editing? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Androol (talk • contribs) 05:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC).

Reminder

Could I please remind you all that Wikipedia is a neutral site, and not a forum for discussion on whether a band is emo. It's an arguement that can't be won, as there are always people who occupy both sides of the debate. It is only concluded with sheer weight of numbers, which is not the way Wikipedia is run. Thus , the /Discussionpage should be deleted.

Instead. your policy should be to cover all the bands who are referenced as emo, from AFI to The Used. Within reason, of course - ignore the morons who think it's funny to tag Iron Maiden as emo on Last.fm. --Jamdav86 18:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion for Clarification

I think it would be a wise choice to create a new article, emo (slang). This would serve to distinguish the dual meaning of the word - a subgenre of alternative rock, characterised by musical and lyrical styles, or a word that high school kids use as freely as they use 'fag'.

examples:

• Sunny Day Real Estate - emo (music)
• Panic! at the Disco - emo (slang)
• self-injury - emo (slang)

etc, etc

Clinton (talk) 02:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Going back through the records here, it looks like that was once the case. If so, why is that no longer the case? Although the style of music may be the influence for the silly slang term, they aren't the same thing - I don't see the Sisters of Mercy page having links to Gothic fiction, even if that is where the term Goth subculture came from. Clinton (talk) 03:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)