Talk:List of Christian punk bands: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:13, 30 September 2008

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Family Force 5?

You got tobe kidding, Family Force Five is not a punk band. If anyone objects, replace them and explain why,butIm removing them unitl then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saksjn (talk • contribs) 14:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple non-punk bands

Many of these bands aren't punk (Olivia the Band? TFK? Flyleaf?) I don't have time now, but later I'm going to make a list of changes, and anyone objecting needs to let me know, cause we need to remove them or this page will be a joke. Saksjn (talk) 14:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are our standards for punk?

We need to set a standard for what bands we include as Punk Rock bands, and those don't. Here are my suggestions: blatantly punk groups, punk-pop groups, ska-punk groups, power pop groups, and hardcore punk groups. I also recommend that we don't list: ska groups, groups that have only one punkish song, and most emo groups. Please comment on what you think the standards should be. Saksjn (talk) 14:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should limit the list to just (real) punk and pop-punk bands. I know of bands that are pure ska and shouldn't be on this list (like FIF), but I'm not sure I know of any Christian ska-punk bands. Could you give examples? Only then could I make a decision on that. As for the hardcore punk issue, I'd keep them on the list if they're "mostly punk", such as xLooking Forwardx, while removing strictly hardcore bands such as War of Ages. Stretch Arm Strong would be borderline I guess. →Ed Gl 23:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

War of Ages are metalcore. Maybe some true pop-punk bands such as MXPX should be listed but not bands such as Hawk Nelson who barely have any punk influence.Mentalhead (talk) 04:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should we broaden our criteria for inclusion?

User:Mentalhead deleted quite a few bands that tend to be more poppy and less punk, while adding bands that tend to be more hardcore/metal. I think it would be a fair compromise to include both the Hawk Nelsons and xLooking Forwardxs of Christian music in this list. Perhaps we can denote (with a * or something) which bands are "poppier" and which are "harder"? I don't know... that could get messy. ~EdGl 14:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If we include pop-punk then we should include hardcore, which is actually "hardcore-punk" after all. XLooking Forwardx is definitely hardcore, the same as No Innocent Victim. Maybe we need more categories like pop-punk and hardcore and keep the true punk bands here. Or else put (pop-punk) and (hardcore punk) after some of them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mentalhead (talk • contribs) 21:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good to me, but it doesn't eliminate the problem of defining what is "punk" and what is "pop-punk" ("punk" and "hardcore" is much easier to differentiate). I'm sure we can get most of them right, but I'm sure there will be some bands that could be considred "punk" and "pop-punk". It seems as good of an idea as any, so I say we go with it. You can add back NIV, but you will also need to add other Christian hardcore bands. Can you do that? ~EdGl 22:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find it hard to differentiate between punk and pop-punk... But some bands such as Our Corpse Destroyed could probably be defined as both punk and hardcore. I added several more bands and put (HxC) and (PP) after some of them. If anyone can come up with a better way of labeling them or wants to organize them that'd be cool. Also I never heard of some of the bands listed so I don't know if they're all labeled correctly.Mentalhead (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It can be difficult to differentiate punk and pop-punk. For example, MxPx is currently labeled as pop-punk, which is true for half of their music. The other half is straight punk. (For example, Contention.) If we start labeling what kind of punk a band is, were in store for quite a few arguments. Saksjn (talk) 13:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MxPx is purely pop-punk now (I don't know what their early albums are like), so I think it would be fitting for them to fall under that category. Mentalhead (talk) 00:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MxPx has been my favorite band since I started liking music in 2002, I have all their albums, etc. Saksjn is correct in that they have a few punk songs. But looking at their discography as a whole, the genre that most fits them is pop-punk. Their first and maybe second albums were almost pure punk, and let it happen has many punk songs, but their other 10 or so albums/eps/comps etc. are nearly pure pop-punk. ~EdGl (talk) 01:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OC Supertones

Should we add them. There not strictly punk persay, but they do have a lot of punk elements in there music. Saksjn (talk) 14:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Like I said above I'm not sure about ska-punk bands but...) I've always considered them to be a ska band, not a punk band (unfortunately Christian ska and the supplementary article List of Christian ska bands [both of which I created btw] were deleted while I was on wikibreak; I didn't even get notified). However, I don't really like the 'Tones and haven't really listened to them. Bottom line, I would remove 'em but I'd rather leave it in the hands of someone who actually knows about the band. →Ed Gl 23:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why were those articles deleted? Just because the genre isn't very active right now doesn't mean that it never was relevant. Wikipedia annoys me sometimes the way they delete things just because one or two of their higher ups thinks its irrelevant.

Their article lists them as Ska-punk, and if you take the horns out of thier music your basically left with punk. Saksjn (talk) 23:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess bands that are "punk with horns" can be on the list, much like Flatfoot 56 ("punk with bagpipes") is on the list. →Ed Gl 01:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I'll add them. Unless you already have that is. Saksjn (talk) 02:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removing non-punk bands

I removed several bands that aren't actually punk. There were some bands listed that I never heard of so I don't know if they are punk or not so I left them alone. I don't know if hardcore punk bands such as Figure Four belong here either but I left them and added a few more since some were listed already.Mentalhead (talk) 04:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyday Sunday

I went ahead and added them. They're not strict punk, but they are definitely pop-punk/power-pop. Saksjn (talk) 13:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are not even pop-punk and should be removed. Mentalhead (talk) 04:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check their article. Saksjn (talk) 13:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? I don't understand; there isn't much in their article. I've heard all of their most popular songs and none of them are pop-punk. They are pop-rock. Mentalhead (talk) 04:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was reffering to the info that lists them as punk. Saksjn (talk) 23:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see. But that doesn't really mean anything. I personally don't think the "punk" link should be there. I wouldn't include them in this article either if it was only up to me. Mentalhead (talk) 07:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emery

Someone added Emery, and I removed them. Does anyone object? Saksjn (talk) 23:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. I don't believe they are a Christian band anyways. nuttyskadork —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.152.110.250 (talk) 20:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More Non-punk bands?

I removed metalcore bands including Haste The Day and As I Lay Dying. I don't see how we can include another, barely related genre, unless we include every Christian music genre (rock, pop, country), and that would lose the point of this page being called "List of Christian Punk Bands".Mentalhead (talk) 23:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. You were right in reverting. ~EdGl (talk) 00:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revert back?

I don't know how to revert back to the latest edit before 134.129.59.158 changed everything, but I think it would be a good idea to do so. It looks way too confusing now and I don't think most people care if something is classified as "oi punk" or "street punk". Some of the bands are labeled incorrectly anyway, i.e. Flatfoot 56 is actually Celtic punk. Mentalhead (talk) 04:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True. Is Flatfoot the only celtic punk band we have on here? If they aren't, we should abbreviate them CP. Saksjn (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are the only one that I know of. Mentalhead (talk) 04:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make a compromise. We label working-class oriented music as "(s)", this covers Oi!, Streetpunk, Celtic Punk, all working-class music. Since it differs greatly with the views of most punk bands, I think it would only be appropriate to keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.129.59.158 (talk) 05:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would that include ska-punk also? nuttyskadork (talk)

What about Christian anarcho (The psalters) or post-punk bands? If "H" means hardcore and "P" means pop punk, shouldn't it be logical we should have a key like this:

Letter	Subgenre	header 3
a	Christian Anarcho-punk	row 1, cell 3
Post	post-punk	row 2, cell 3
s	street punk

Chris Henniker (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there were enough bands I think it would make sense, but there aren't many Christian punk bands as it is. And the average user probably doesn't even know what those sub-genres mean. Just my opinion. Mentalhead (talk) 15:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Types of punk

I'm adding a section where we can debate and hopefully reach a consensus on whether certain genres belong in punk. Feel free to add another sub-genre to the debate. Saksjn (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pop-Punk

Belongs It is the most prominent form of punk today, and contains many of the typical elements of punk. Saksjn (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely belongs. ~EdGl (talk) 00:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. If they are true pop-punk bands I don't have a problem with it, but I don't think the modern so-called "pop-punk" bands such as Stellar Kart should be included. Mentalhead (talk) 04:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If we have reliable sources calling them punk-pop, we should go with it. Saksjn (talk) 12:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes that will work, but what counts as a reliable source? Some bands even say they are punk when they aren't. If we know what punk actually is then I think that would be a better way to judge bands. Remember that nowadays nearly anything is called punk, when actually it is not. Mentalhead (talk) 03:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that I'm so young and didn't experience the glory days of punk (wish I did), but I've always heard bands such as Stellar Kart reffered to as punk or pop-punk. Modern Punk is Pop-Punk, unfortunately there aren't many real punk bands left, but the genre still lives. Saksjn (talk) 00:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not old either, but I don't like how they call pop-punk and pop-rock bands punk nowadays. It still doesn't make them punk. Our Corpse Destroyed, Hanover Saints and The Havoc (recently disbanded) are some examples of modern bands that are/were still pure punk. Mentalhead (talk) 00:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Powerpop

Maybe its pop-punk, but leans more in the pop direction. Saksjn (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, it would have to be mostly pop-punk in order to be included IMHO. ~EdGl (talk) 00:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No. I don't think it should be included, as it doesn't really have any elements of punk in it. Mentalhead (talk) 04:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should we go with sources, or try to make up are own minds? Saksjn (talk) 12:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm for making up our own minds unless you know of some sources that are actually very reliable.Mentalhead (talk) 03:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia policies require us to go with sources. A reliable source in this case would be an album review, professional profile, etc. It would NOT be a fan site, myspace, official website, iTunes review, etc.

But for something like this there isn't usually an actual "reliable" source, where do you expect to find one that you know is accurate? Mentalhead (talk) 16:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, a professional review site or something like it. Saksjn (talk) 23:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ska-Punk

Yes as long as the band has enough punk. Saksjn (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should judge this on a case-by-case basis (not many bands to go thru). ~EdGl (talk) 00:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. Ska would kind of be stretching it, but it depends on which bands. Some "ska" bands such as the Supertones were more rock with horns than punk with horns. Mentalhead (talk) 04:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Celtic/Irish Punk

Yes It's punk. Saksjn (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but since there's so few bands in this subgenre, this should be an open-and-shut case. ~EdGl (talk) 00:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Punk with any other instruments added in is still punk, but yes, there are very few Christian Celtic punk bands.Mentalhead (talk) 04:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hardcore Punk

Yes Saksjn (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but obviously there is a line between hardcore and metal. ~EdGl (talk) 00:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Definitely, hardcore is simply heavier punk.Mentalhead (talk) 04:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emo

No exception: punk bands that are often categorized as emo. Saksjn (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No (but if 7-10 Split is classified as emo, there's an exception or two). ~EdGl (talk) 00:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No. Most bands that are classified as "emo" are actually rock, pop-punk or indie. So I don't think it should be added here because there are very few Christian emo bands.Mentalhead (talk) 04:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No Modern "Emo" has nothing to do with punk. Inhumer (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See comment on Talk:Christian rock

I put a comment on that talk page, please respond to it. Saksjn (talk) 23:58, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bunch of new bands

Somebody just added a bunch of new bands, can somebody review them? Saksjn (talk) 13:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dingees, Discarded, Lugnut, and One Bad Pig I've at least heard of (and I have Lugnut's only album which is really fast, really good, Christian punk), but the others I haven't. I'll Google the others shortly. ~EdGl (talk) 19:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm better with post-1998 bands. Saksjn (talk) 20:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed a couple bands I couldn't find anything for and kept the bands with myspaces and with other sites mentioning them. "The Fraidy Cats" and "Spudgun" have one (the same) website mentioning them, but that's it, so I removed those two. ~EdGl (talk) 20:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Classic Crime and the OC Supertones. Mentalhead (talk) 22:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. What would you guys consider Classic Crime to be anyways? Alternative? Saksjn (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh, I don't even know. I just know they're not punk. Mentalhead (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MxPx and Slick Shoes as Pop-Punk

MxPx, in my opinion, is a dual genre band. Much of the stuff in the middle of their career was pop punk, thanks to capitol records of course, but the stuff at the beginning and much of their newer stuff is punk. How do we choose which part of their career to label them with? Slick Shoes is a band that stands right on the border between pop punk and punk... they're both and not both. Labeling them as either seems to be incorrect. I know this would be impossible because of policies but it seems that we need to label bands on a 1-10 scale, 5 being punk, 10 being hardcore punk, and 1 being pop-punk. MxPx and Slick Shoes would probably be in the 3-4 range. Saksjn (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 164: / Line 164: @@
 :heh, I don't even know. I just know they're not punk. [[User:Mentalhead|Mentalhead]] ([[User talk:Mentalhead|talk]]) 18:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
+== MxPx and Slick Shoes as Pop-Punk ==
+MxPx, in my opinion, is a dual genre band. Much of the stuff in the middle of their career was pop punk, thanks to capitol records of course, but the stuff at the beginning and much of their newer stuff is punk. How do we choose which part of their career to label them with? Slick Shoes is a band that stands right on the border between pop punk and punk... they're both and not both.  Labeling them as either seems to be incorrect. I know this would be impossible because of policies but it seems that we need to label bands on a 1-10 scale, 5 being punk, 10 being hardcore punk, and 1 being pop-punk. MxPx and Slick Shoes would probably be in the 3-4 range. [[User:Saksjn|Saksjn]] ([[User talk:Saksjn|talk]]) 13:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)