Talk:Glam rock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Screaming Lord Sutch needs to be added[edit]

Screaming Lord Sutch's 1970 album "Screaming Lord Sutch and Heavy Friends" needs to be added because it was the first attempt at a hard rock glam album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Added some[edit]

Namely Thomas Dolby, Blondie, Lene Lovich, Nina Hagen, Frank Zappa, etc.. I guess the androgeny was a big part of it, then what do you call Blondie and David Bowie, the concept of becoming a fictional chracter on stage.. David Bowie told people on stage he would never been Ziggy again, the idea was he attached his addiction to drugs with his on stage persona. Also Debra Harry identified herself on stage as this sex symbol but she was who she was on stage.. Read the Blondie Biography if you don't believe me. I guess Queen, Blondie, Frank Zappa, Alice Cooper, and such belong to a genre called Rock opera.

I am adding a comment on the bottom of this page, partly in response to this comment and the additions. I guess I should say here that I do not agree that Blondie or Frank Zappa are "Glam rock," but I am not going to remove them. It would take a lot more than that for this article as its stands now, with its different and conflicting ideas of what "Glam rock" is, to make much sense. Zeutron 17:33, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Frankly, when it comes to statements like "The most famous exponents..." you know there's going to be some disagreement. I don't think that anyone is going to argue too strenuously bout Bowie being a "famous exponent" but practically all others are up for grabs. Really, I've never even heard of Marc Bolan (listed as "famous") and I'm not bringing any of the music of Slade to mind. I'm not even sure if that's a group or a guy.

But here you have an example of what happens when editorial statements are presented as fact. The article needs to site more sources and back up some of its arguments.

There's something else that's bugging me about that paragraph. I'm not sure what is meant by "Other influential performers include...." Are we saying they influenced Glam Rock? The thing that makes the sentence confusing is the word "Other." Because of that, it is implied that the previous people in the list are influential as well, but they are part of the "famous exponents" list. So really, I don't understand it at all.

I think the article needs some more work. Gingermint (talk) 22:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge of "Glam Rock"[edit]

This text was at the incorrectly capitalized Glam Rock and should be merged into this article:

Branch of pop music in the early 1970s in Britain. Popularised by Marc Bolan and David Bowie, it also included lesser lights such as Slade, Gary Glitter and Sweet. Other bands such as Roxy Music were temporarily associated with the fad, but lived to fight another day. Purveyors of Glam Rock dressed in platform boots, wore elaborate make up and sequinned stage costumes inspired by science fiction and alien motifs. In the hands of someone like Bowie (on for instance his landmark album Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders From Mars) this represented a playful exploration of themes of gender, androgny and alienation, whereas Slade were essentially bricklayers in second rate drag (although they produced excellent pop music).

I really like this text (above). It is far superior to what is presently posted.Gingermint (talk) 22:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, except for the editorializing of course. As fun as it is it shouldn't really be in an article. Bricklayers in second-rate drag? Gingermint (talk) 22:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

New York Dolls[edit]

Surely something on the influence of the New York Dolls needs to be added to this article??? and the direct lineage from glam to Punk rock quercus robur

Absolutely. I've added some words on them ~GZ 11/4/05


Hmm...I think this article needs a rewrite. Glam rock wasn't about "statements against Pink Floyd" or "unabashed embracing of fame and wealth". It was about fun. To mention acts peripheral to the movement (Roxy Music, David Bowie and Jobriath) and not mention Slade at all (except at number 20 in a list) is ridiculous. --Auximines 09:44, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

I partly agree with you - though to call Roxy and Bowie "peripheral" is to my mind completely wrong - they were central figures. There were a lot of acts that jumped on this particular bandwagon (as always) and made superficial music (as always), much of which is what is largely remembered. I wouldn't count Slade amongst them however, I think you're right in that they deserve more prominence. Jobraith is hard to comment about - I'd never heard of him, but clearly someone thought he deserved a big heap of credit in this article, which might simply be a case of fan worship overcoming encyclopedic objectivity. Feel free to amend, append or edit as you see fit - though as it stands I feel the article does make some worthwhile points. Graham 22:45, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
I'm glad I'm not the only one not to have heard of Jobriath! I'm inclined to remove all references to him. My point was, say "glam rock" to anyone who remembers the period, and they will think first of Slade, Sweet, T Rex, Gary Glitter and Wizzard. Roxy Music weren't really mainstream glam, more a forerunner.'re right, he was pretty central to everything. He did so much you can't label him. As for superficiality, I agree many of the bands were superficial, but that's not a reason to exclude them.
Here's what I think needs doing:
- Tone down the pretentious bits of the first paragraph and get the word 'fun' somewhere in there.
- Add another large paragraph about glam at its height. Detail some of the excesses and mention some of the biggest hits.
- Prune the list a bit, removing the obscure entries and the non-glam entries. The longer these lists get, the less useful they are.
--Auximines 08:05, 12 May 2004 (UTC)
I've heard of Jobriath, I'm certain many others have as well. Englishrose 20:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

This is rediculous. WHy the hell is Maralyn Manson on the list of Glam Rock acts?

The article needs a cleanup. Too many cooks wanting to make sure their 80s/90s faves are mentioned have spoiled the broth.

Glam73 04:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)==Glam scenes== I tend to disagree with parts of the summary, and with much of the comments here. I think there are a few different forms of glam rock, and there are different artists in the forefront of each "scene".

The scene I most identify with, the one reflected in Todd Haynes "Velvet Goldmine" and the inspiration for "Hedwig", was not precisely about fame, wealth, or fun - it was about self-invention, sexuality, decadance (wealth is only a small part), and *subversion*. This history starts with Marc Bolan and T.Rex (now *that* was a ridiculous ommission), followed by Bowie, who is *the* archtype for glam rock - no argument, other artists include Iggy Pop, Lou Reed, of course Roxy Music, and the NYDolls. Many of these artists, Iggy most prominently, are also called "proto-punk" because of their later influence.

Though there was a lot of affectation and certainly the icons and the followers enjoyed themselves to excess, history has shown that these are some of the most revolutionary and profound *artists* in popular music. No one can tell me that Yes is more "artistic" than Lou freakin Reed, I mean, please!

No offense meant here to more feelgood and bubblegum glam like Sweet and Slade, I think they're great and their music does exactly what it was intended to do. But there was absolutely nothing subversive or provocative about them, they embraced the style of the movement, but not the spirit.

Oh, yeah, and Jobraith was huge in Britain, but history has swept him under the carpet.

-- Deborah

Velvet Goldmine was Todd's fantasy on what glam could have been. The Sweet/Slade etc. type of glam was far more popular and prevailing.
If we break it down to 'glam scenes' I guess there'd be:
The Bowie/Jobriath/BeBop arty rock stuff.
The Sweet/Slade trad glam.
The Gary/Alvin/Suzi/Mud glitter stuff.
The NYDolls/HBrats proto-punk.
The Showaddywaddy/Rubettes 50s revivalists.
The KISS/Alice/Silverhead HR/metal stuff.
The Roxy/DSchool/CRebel cabaret/theatre stuff.
...I think that's about it! Maybe there should be a section on glam sub-genres? Metalion SOS 01:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems that some 35 + years after Glam Rock first popped it's glittery visage into the Rock Scene and Popular Culture, most people still don't know what to make of or how to "define" "Glam Rock"?

Glam Rock, started in late 1970 with "Ride a White Swan" by T.Rex. It was almost a complete one man show until the end of 71, when Slade & Rod Stewart started to make their presence known. Although, Sweet were in the charts by then "Co Co" was definitely not Glam!

The story really started in 72 and hit it's peak in 73. By end of 73/early 74 the light weight, 2nd generation "glam rock acts" began to take over. That said, some great singles came out of that period and even "real" bands like Cockney Rebel and of course Queen.

Now, anything after 1976 isn't really part of the original glam movement. Glam was out and Punk was in, as a matter of fact,it's generally considered that by 1975 Glam Rock was becoming rather passe.All one needs to do is check out the pop charts to verify this...

Also, in regards to all the various "Glam Styles" there are quite a few from the original days, as Deborah been pointed out. I would like to make one correction though. The "Arty/Cabaret/Theatrical Scene" of Glam is one and the same. Roxy, Bowie, Be Bop Deluxe, Cockney Rebel...that's all one area of glam. The "Theatrical" side of Glam has to be credited to all, since all the acts were performing one form of Theatre or Pantomime in some fashion....even if came across a bit crude at times,it was all "razzle dazzle"

There is no denying that the impact Glam Rock has had on other forms of musical trends following it's wake, is rather powerful.Giving it much more muscle and lasting power than anyone could have imagined at the time.Considering, it was thought as very "frivolous" and "juvenile" and more often than not loathed by "serious" rock critics and fans alike! Sadly, it still has many debunkers today and is usually always over-shadowed by punk.

Regardless,Glam has influenced many, from Punk/New Wave acts of the 70's to New Romantics/Goths of the 80's and the Brit -Poppers of the 90's and beyond.I am more than willing and able to debate on this topic for the weary reader.

In conclusion though, when "discussing" Glam-Rock, that period should be kept to the years that it was a relevant musical force [71-76] Anything, after that, is posthumous and to to a certain extent superfluous.



Would Abba count as Glam Rock? Aren't they more of Disco-Pop?

I think they count. Certainly their initial success with Waterloo in the UK was achieved by ditching the by-then tired "boom bang-a-bang" type of Eurovision song, and jumping on the Glam bandwagon, which by then ('74) was in full swing. The costumes were lifted straight out of Wizzard's, Glitterband's and T-Rex's wardrobe. Waterloo itself broke the mould for Eurovision at the time, being easily seen as a popped-up version of "See My Baby Jive", etc. Later they jumped on further bandwagons, like Disco, (oddly though, never punk... ;-) but they were definitely part of the mainstream of glam. Other bands did much the same - I think it tends to be forgotten that most musical movements consist of one or two innovators and a far larger bulk of bandwagon jumpers. This isn't to take anything away from Abba - I actually think they were pretty good at what they did - but they were not innovators as far as glam was concerned. Graham 03:24, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No, they weren't a glam rock act. They had two singles ('Ring Ring' and 'Waterloo') that could be seen as in the glam rock style (especially visually in terms of the clothes and videos) but they never made a whole album in this genre and were only briefly dipping into it - as they did numerous other styles such as West Coast country rock, Continental schlager, musical theatre and, of course, disco. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 01:27, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree Abba weren't a glam rock act, but I think a mention of the very glam-influenced Waterloo winning Eurovision in 74 would be relevant, to demonstrate how glam had gone mainstream and international at that point. --PRL1973 (talk) 10:23, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

This entire piece is completely incorrect from end to end.[edit]

Came here from Homerton

The two bits that are totally making me laugh are:

'[...]a statement of sorts against such acts as Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Yes and Genesis...]

(Hee, hee - ever seen them pix of Peter Gabriel dressed as as a Daffodil? And as if Glam rockers were making a 'statement'. And where are Slade, Gary Glitter and The Sweet?)

Followed later by:

'Glam rock was a major influence upon the late 1970s UK punk rock movement, particularly the Sex Pistols.'

Ho ho ho. But, yes say I, most definitely an influence, though not I think in the way the original writer means. Carts, horses (in the wrong order) and old Mother Hubbard's blooming kitchen sink have been thrown in here, frankly.

My summation - so-called 'glam rock' filled in a hiatus in British musical creativity from about 1973 to 1976 when old-fashioned music hall 'entertainers' tried to fill the gap (where's me washboard?). This counter-revolution was crushed, decisively, in 1976.

(I am not including forward-thinking bands like Roxy Music who were jumping on the bandwagon costume-wise just to get noticed, or great American artists like Lou Reed, who seem to be getting lumped in with 'glam rock' here simply for wearing make-up. Sheesh. And let's not do Bowie. Please.)

Tarquin Binary

I see the point you're trying to make, but I also think you're wrong. David Bowie? filling in a hiatus? Get real! Yes there were a lot of bandwagon jumpers (see my earlier comment, above) but there were also true innovators. There is no doubt that glam was as real as it was short-lived, but nevertheless, it was a genuine phenomenon. Punk can also be easily seen as an evolution of glam, though it was also a decisive blow against it. Paradoxical, perhaps, but true. One thing I can agree on though - the article isn't very good as it stands. There's a much better, bigger article in here crying to get out - so feel free to add anything you want, though do bear in mind the rules about NPOV. Graham 03:44, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm being provocative. Bowie was ever mutable, that's why I won't go there. But did I say that glam was not a phenomenon? Look at the two statements I objected to, however. They're wrong. And I was about to add, with regard to an earlier poster's point, no, Jobraith was not huge, he was like unknown?. I've just checked with some folk, I'm of that age - it ain't just me.
One fundamental disagreement between us - I do not agree that punk was any kind of evolution out of glam. Punk, in my opinion, was a reaction here against the deadly combination of the heavy metal cock-rock of the time and pomp-rock like (eek) Barclay James Harvest. That's why I feel that glam was neither here nor there.
And hey, hang on with the NPOV stuff, I have not altered this article, nor do I intend to, just found it amusing so chimed in with my fivepenny-worth. Why did you up the Defcon Level when I was simply still previewing my reply on the discussion? Oh, just forget about it.
Tarquin Binary 04:04, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
I think we largely agree then, punk notwithstanding. I'm not enough of an expert on either punk or glam to say with any certainty that punk WAS an evolution - in many ways it's an antithesis - but maybe you're right, it's just irrelevant. Glam was more or less over before punk came to prominence - in fact I seem to remember that 1976 was a very poor year for music in general, it seemed as if nothing at all came along that was very interesting (just like 1996-present really, and it was '77 before I really noticed punk). I've never heard of Jobraith either. Not sure what you're referring to with the defcon remark - I only suggest that if you are inclined to edit the article, you might find it hard to remain NPOV since you obviously have a strong opinion - I didn't mean to say that the opinion is invalid, just that the article needs to be neutral (albeit possibly less interesting as a result). Look, I don't like the article as it stands either, but it's hard to know how to change it. Perhaps a friendly neighbourhood rock journo with knowledge of this period can heklp put it all into perspective? Graham 05:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
The NPOV was me being paranoid, timing, I watch logs. (Ignore - though I will still add I have not changed, or deleted one word of this article) So...
We likely do agree - except that punk is crucial. I do not want to pull rank (because that is quite anti-punk), but I was actually there, as it happens. I was at the Roxy, I saw the Pistols at the Hope & Anchor in Islington when punk was being condemned by a lot of right-on middle-class lefties (like me before I saw the guys!) as 'fascist' (as if, it was left-anarchist if anything, but I helped to persuade most of the brothers and sisters that it wasn't Nazi).
OK - one of the direct ancestors of punk was a phenomenon in London called 'Pub Rock'. This included (Google it!) people like Ian Dury (in Kilburn and the High Roads), Doctor Feelgood - and many many other bands. There was also another component from the US that came from the NY Dolls (they were brilliant - but no-one ever said they were glam rock in the UK. I have a feeling that this is where the 'glam'->'punk' thing is coming from, though. I do not want to dis the US here - all decent modern pop music harks back to the Velvets, but glamrock was not a US thang in the 1970s anyway.)
Deep breath - I just have a blooming prob with this glamrock ->punkrock lineage. It is so wrong in so many ways it's just not true. What about that wossname bloke that someone said was huge - ha, ha - irrelevant.
What can I say - I was blooming well there, mate, and this article is from poxy la-la land. And note that I still have not touched a word of it. I might be an old punk, but I strongly believe in dialogue.
Want to talk Clash, the Jam, the Gorillas (No z)? Totally different head :)
Tarquin Binary 05:45, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Tarquin if you're still keeping tabs with this all these years later, if you were so thoroughly "THERE" as you seem to think you were then by 1978 you would have been into the original punk version of Adam and the Ants. Live, they were SCREAMINGLY Glam - far more so than the later "Kings Of The Wild Frontier" version in fact.
The Bromley Contingent were thoroughly Glam, the Banshees were heavily Glam influenced and even covered 20th Century Boy, Jordan was Glam, Marco Pirroni was and is still Glam and damn proud of it. Marc Bolan struck up a mutal admiration soceity with just about every punk band going in '77.
The New Romantic movement was formed by Glam punks who broke away from punk in protest at the takeover of punk by social realist hippies like the Clash and Sham 69. Even those Crass idiots were named after a line from Ziggy Stardust. (talk) 22:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)



I have deleted Electric Light Orchestra from the list of "glam rock" artists. I have serious doubts about a few of the others such as Abba and Bay City Rollers, especially given this description of what "glam rock" is:

The emphasis was on superficiality and an unabashed embracing of decadence, fame, and sexuality, a statement of sorts against such acts as Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Yes and Genesis, whose music was often referred to by critics as art rock.

I have, nevertheless, left those groups there because of the other descriptions of "glam rock" such as makeup, wild clothing, etc. Others more familiar with Abba and Bay City Rollers can decide whether they fill the bill. However, I know ELO, and I am pretty certain they were not a "glam rock" act, however it is defined. In fact, in the early part of their career they were closer to the "art rock" groups described above. (And the article on "Progressive rock" lists ELO (along with Queen and Renaissance) as being in the more "commercial" branch of "progressive rock" and gives the alternative labels of "commercial rock" (whatever that means) and "symphonic pop" (pretty accurate) for these acts.) Later on, ELO turned in the direction of disco, but this does make them glam rockers. I do not think they were known for embracing "decadence, fame and sexuality." They were not "androgynous." I think the combination of "commercialized progressive rock" and "symphonic pop" probably come about as close as labels can in describing them, or maybe they get their own labels, "symphonic rock"/"progressive pop." But I digress. The point is, they are not "glam rock." I have other problems with this whole article but I will let this be it for now. Zeutron 16:56, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Blondie, and Other Problems[edit]

In reading and in helping to edit this article over the past couple months, it is obvious that the article suffers from a complete lack of agreement among various writers as to what "Glam rock" actually is. The text contains several different ideas as to what it is and isn't, but that by itself is not so bad. The real problem is with the list of artists. It contains a number of artists that I have never considered Glam rock, and now it also contains Blondie and Frank Zappa. It seems to me that this is getting away from the idea of "androgyny," which I thought was always an element of Glam rock. When a female "acts feminine," that is not androgyny. (Is it?) As for Frank Zappa, he often acted in a "theatrical" manner but not androgynously, that I know of. Maybe part of the problem is that some people believe that any theatricality in a musical act makes it "Glam rock," but I don't know where that idea comes from. The comment from the Blondie-adding editor at the top of this page mentions the idea of "Rock opera," which has its own problems (since Rock opera is already an accepted term for things like "Tommy"), but it does point out the need for a different term. "Theater rock"? I don't know. But until there is some common understanding of what the title of this article means, it will remain the mess it is now, with a list of artists that goes far beyond "Glam rock." Zeutron 17:33, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree that there are artistes here which are not Glam, but rather, New Wave, which I suppose could be seen as an evolution of glam. be bold and change what you see are errors - from what I read you seem to be on the right track. I'm not sure androgeny is per se a defining characteristic of glam however - while many acts were androgynous, not all were. I guess glam was an outlet for those who wanted to have an androgynous style - there weren't many other opportunities at the time! Graham 00:11, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
At least New Wave was a direct spinoff - I currently have a bigger problem with the inclusion of Faster Pussycat and Mötley Crüe on this list, while theatrical, these bands are probably mostly thought of as hair metal, which has its own page. - AKeen 00:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
I would agree with the above, I'll edit out the Glam metal groups, Marilyn Manson should probably stay due to his Bowie-esque album. - Deathrocker 00:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

from my reading on the net, i get the idea that (in the united states at least), british punk was seen as an evolution of glam rock. john holmstrom (whom some credit, erroneously, as the originator of the term "punk") once stated that he was disappointed about the extent to which the british bands were glam influenced. he felt that AUTHENTIC punk should be a reaction against glam, not an embrace of it. yet he acknowledged that britpunk had moved in a somewhat different direction. (perhaps he should be recruited to do a rewrite of the glam article in order to clear up the confusion.) in any case, stephen erlewine's "sex pistols" entry in the musicmatch guide (correctly) states that this band was influenced by glam acts such as david bowie, alice cooper, mott the hoople, the new york dolls, and t rex. (yes, i consider them all to be glam acts.)

Please Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks. Hyacinth 09:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

merge with glam metal[edit]

Since there is quite some overlap between these genres and imo glam metal is a misnomer -- in fact I have also referred to it as glam rock -- I propose to merge both articles together under Glam rock - Spearhead

Removed tag, due to person proposing it having seemingly little/no knowledge of either movement.
David Bowie belongs in the same genre as Warrant?... did you even think before you put the tag on this article or even read each and consider what they are about and which bands fit into those categories? Probably not.
It appears you are a fan of Death Metal, my estimation would be you do not like Glam Metal being associated with metal and present yourself as a so called "metal elitist", although it is highly likely that you know little to nothing about the actual genre of metal that emerged from hard rock in the 1970s and the values which went along with those bands.
Unfortunely for you Glam Metal was the most dominant metal gen:re of the 1980s and is even accepted by many prominent metal website because of the closer values bands like Twisted Sister, W.A.S.P., etc share with the likes of Black Sabbath and Deep Purple, than say Cannibal Corpse or Deicide do.
Glam Rock is an entirely different monster, which Glam Metal (the genre you are bias against) took influence from.. from a mostly visual stand point, they are not one and the same.
Listen to the music of Roxy Music, David Bowie and T. Rex then W.A.S.P., Dokken or any of those bands.... make an effort to think and then try to say the two belong in the same grouping, you will be left feeling rather foolish.
It would be like somebody who lacks knowledge on both genres proposing a Deathrock and Death Metal merge because they both sing about Death and have the word in-common with their genres, even though the two are completely different movements.
Sorry to rant but deliberate ignorance is nauseating. -

Actually hair ( glam ) metal is not really metal at all; it is glam rock. A band such as Montley Crue has never sounded as technical as the heavy metal bands Iron Maiden and Judas Priest. These are facts.

Now quit watching VH1 for your information about metal.


And no...just because Pantera used to be a glam rock band that still doesn't make this genre a metal genre. Shady_Joe

You haven't got the slightest idea of what you are talking about, let alone possession of any "facts" or knowledge of either heavy metal, glam rock or glam metal. - Deathrocker 04:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Then you provide to me with "facts" that glam metal isn't "glam rock". Do. It. NOW! Shady_Joe

Read the two articles, Einstein. Its all explained there. - Deathrocker 06:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I did and I highly disagree with them. Also, I asked you to provide me with sources outside of Wikipedia. Shady_Joe

The problem here is this was called "Glitter Rock" at the time, and not "glam". The "glam metal" movement was much later, and was a sort of copy of the glitter look. DavidRavenMoon (talk) 08:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Though maybe you think it's not "real metal", Glam rock and Glam metal are NOT the same thing!!! There's a HUGE difference there! The only thing common is the glitter... THIS is one of the most famous glam rock songs, and THIS is one of the most famous glam metal songs. I agree that glam metal is not like the "real" metal of for instance Iron Maiden, but still it has nothing to do with glam rock. It's a kind of mixture between Heavy metal, Rock and Pop. I think it's more commonly known as "80s rock". Just that they have a similiar name, doesn't make them the same thing at all!!!!! (talk) 12:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


What is the etymology of the term glam rock? I always thought it was short for glamour, but the word glamour doesn't even appear once in this article.

Please sign your posts on talk pages per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 10:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because many of the performers wore makeup. But it was called Glitter Rock back then, not Glam Rock. Glam rock started in the 80s with the hair bands. DavidRavenMoon (talk) 00:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

The Darkness[edit]

I think it's a bit contridictory to say that The Darkness is a glam rock band on this page, then on their own page say that they aren't. I think the example of The Darkness in modern glam rock should be replaced with a band more fitting, such as Placebo. --TealMan 04:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


"oozing with sexual energy"? That's ridiculously unencyclopedic. There's really no better way to describe it? You can't say "filled with sexual overtones" or "sexual in nature"? I'm surprised no one has questioned it since it was put in on 09:03, December 23, 2005. --Berserk798 00:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Baritone Saxophones?[edit]

Shouldn't baritone saxophones be categorised as one of glam-rock's main instruments, just because it shows up in many of the famous examples such as "Bang A Gong (Get It On)" (T. Rex) and "All the Way From Memphis" (Mott the Hoople). I think it needs a mention at least if not a place in the instruments column Meddling 14:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)Meddling


I added a bit about Schaffel as it is a genre pretty much entirley based on the glam rock beat as heard in tunes like TRex hot love. There are quite a few remixes of Glam Rock tunes by Schaffel producers about as well like this one (mp3) of Hot Love from Juno. --cloudo 22:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Female glam rock[edit]

"lone female glam rocker Suzi Quatro"

This is very misleading. Maybe she WAS the only one, with regardes to commercial success, but what about singers/groups like Zenda Jacks, Ayshea, Lynsey de Paul, Bobbie McGee, Slack Alice, Fanny, Kristine Sparkle, The Runaways..? The glam newbie could easily get the wrong idea. Metalion SOS 01:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

not to mention wayne county

Scissor Sisters Glam?[edit]

It seems to me that people today are calling two very different things "glam. On branch could be considered bands like Alice Cooper who led to glam acts like Marylin Manson, while another branch could be considered bands like Elton John who led to acts like the Scissor Sisters. So are very different modern groups like the Scissor Sisters and Marylin Manson both be considered glam? They both use psudonyms, androgyny and elaborate stage acts, but the Sisters are much more sexual while most of the darker acts mentioned here are only sexual in an "in your face" kind of way. 21:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


First of all, the Alice Cooper image rm'd was from Wikimedia Commons and under GNU. Second, after reading WP:IDP#Fair use rationale they seem to fall well within fair use, which allows their use as low-res illustrations on the English Wikipedia. I reverted them back. VanTucky 18:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


I don't get the fixation of calling Kiss a glam band. They don't look androgynous and stuck to black and white outfits and face paint, as opposed to being multicoloured. Musically, they represent hard rock/heavy metal/stadium rock, and I can't think of one truelly glammy Kiss song.

They were part of the NY glam scene and their original image was very Dolls-like. And you can hear their Slade, Mott etc. influence in many songs. I think that's reason enough for them to be listed. Metalion SOS 02:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
gene simmons has said the original concept behind kiss was a ny dolls that could play their instruments
interesting. gotta citation for that? -- carol 09:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
KISS is a Hard rock/Heavy Metal band and they have nothing to do with glam rock just like the first guy said.Zakkman (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Just some evidence for the pro side, the books: Glam! Bowie, Bolan And The Glitter Rock Revolution by Barney Hoskyns, 20th Century Rock And Roll: Glam Rock by Dave Thompson and Crash Course For The Ravers: A Glam Odyssey by Philip Cato all list KISS as being a glam rock band. Martin Popoff's Collector's Guide's do too. Metalion SOS (talk) 00:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitive definitions via explanation[edit]

Call me too old to rock and roll but too young to die (but don't call me Ian Anderson I am not a flautist), and help me to understand these new definitions of the music I was listening to when I was coming of age.

Born in 1962, I recently looked at the Billboard charts for the month of my conception and realized this about myself -- that my dad would like to say that Dave Brubeck Quartets Take Five was playing and my mom would like to say that Harry Belafontes Banana Boat Song was playing and the fact is that when I was very very young, 2 or 3 years old maybe (before my brother was born and definitely before I knew any better) I would sing along with Andy Williams when he was on the television (he had his own televised show) back then singing Moon River. Those were songs that were being played on the radio in the area and time that I was conceived and this is the painful truth that I had to face about myself recently. (On a side note, I suggest that this exercise in reality of trying to guess what song might have been being played when you were conceived be put off until you reach your 4th decade.)

Listening to the music of the seventies, my eighteenth birthday was in 1980 so my maturity was such, I had no ear for the noncommercial radio that was being broadcast locally to where I was (as the air waves just were back then) and it was all sound. There were very few visual images other than the album art (and some magazines) with a few exceptions: the video for Cheech and Chongs Basketball Jones, the video for the Rolling Stones It's Only Rock and Roll, and whatever performers could find an invitation to be on whatever magazine style television show that was on one of the two or three networks whose broadcasts your antennae could gather (like the Ed Sullivan Show or several others). Interestingly enough, one of my favorite songs from then is David Bowies Sound and Vision and for me, the only visual indication there was that he was going to become the father of (let me call it) Fashion Rock were his album covers.

Then I saw a lot of them on the MTV.

Starting in the mid-1980s, I had a hell of a time trying to find music in record stores. Seriously. The 'how did they classify that' problem has become so complex that it is in many ways, no longer useful to a simple appreciator of music and recorded media.

I tried to read through the Tree of life of Glam rock on this page and I think that I am as confused as the page is now. I have, without research and without knowledge and without knowing what I am talking about at all, come to define Glam Rock as a sarcastic and editorial statement about the fashion world/industry. I was glad to see that Sade had been taken off the list because she seemed to have helped to define the fashion world and found a place within it which is totally lacking in editorial or sarcasm -- and perhaps this was not intentional but it is what happened.

If you want to say that Alice Cooper is the father and that David Bowie is the mother of Marilyn Manson that is fine by me, I was actually force-fed Marilyn Manson -- a pagan janitor on a motorcycle duct taped a telephone receiver handset to one of the speakers of an old boombox and in that way, broadcast it via intercom into the small office where I was trying to add lists of intake and reconcile them with the reports that took it in. All that I can say now is that interviews with Marilyn Manson now are as interesting as quotations from Ted Nugent were back then ('then' being before he took up hunting) and I still wonder what the problem was with Fred.... And out of respect for all of the artists involved (and even the pagan janitor with the duct tape) citing what Marilyn has to say about it is the best thing.

Help me to understand the definition (be nice because I should have already paid some dues via the method of my introduction to Marilyn Manson) and perhaps the article will be "much much better" (that is a Laurie Anderson quote, btw). -- carol 10:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

ps. For what is is worth, I was probably conceived at a drive-in movie theater. The little loud speakers that you hung on the window also had heaters and that would have been perhaps mandatory in Michigan, in December, in 1961 -- so the whole music conception exercise was probably an exercise in the futility of trying to figure out happened when you were being made. -- carol 10:15, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
listen to the fall or soemthing and stop trying to categorize music —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Theories about influences[edit]

My theory about who would be the parents of Marilyn Manson is that it is not Alice Cooper and David Bowie, as would be convenient, but instead Cher and Gene Simmons. According to the 'instructions' you should ask Alice, when you are ten feet tall. How tall must you be to ask Marilyn? -- carol 10:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Sources, references, articles[edit]

Hi, the one thing that will stop all the arguing about glam rock history is if we switch to using sources and references. OK, the arguing won't stop, but at least it will be a different kind of arguing. Instead of debating how to categorize this or that T.Rex album, based on one's opinion and (anonymous) knowledge, we would be debating over how reputable the sources are.......................................Thus the arguments would be more like "You added in the 'glam rock' definition from the Penguin guide from 1999?? The author of that article is a jazz reviewer who has never published a single article on rock or pop". Or "You added a quote from BatBite magazine?? The Oxford University Press guide to rock calls that an "unreliable magazine with poor quality control and zero fact-checking." At least that way we'd be basing our edits on what the most reputable music critics, music journalists, and music historians have published. : ) ====Nazamo (talk) 19:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


Not sure how much of a mention Afro-futurists like George Clinton merit here, but right now there is no mention at all, which seems wrong. Same period, similar look (though a pretty different sound), similar injection of sci-fi & mythological themes. I suspect Jason King may have written something on this, because here is an abstract of a talk he gave on the connection. - Jmabel | Talk 16:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Making a fool of ourselves quoting Encarta[edit]

Must we quote Encarta with that "most famous exponents" sentence? It seems like it makes a pretty gross generalization about a broad movement, putting Marc Bolan, the Sweet, and Gary Glitter in a batch as sort of the three central groups of a movement without any sort of strong means of classification. They all had decent chart performance, but then this statement utterly overlooks Slade, who had an amazing set of number one hits in the UK. You could talk about musical influence, but ultimately, groups like "the Sweet" and "Gary Glitter" had little bearing on any sort of musical style, much less any of the groups given the vast spectrum of what groups are classified as "glam rock" simply as an image term. And one can't underestimate the significance of David Bowie, who on top of his influence in the spread of glam actually had a decent crossover in the United States - you'll discover that in the U.S., the Sweet is non-existant, Gary Glitter is just a child molester, and you can't even say "he was the singer in T. Rex" to tell anyone who Marc Bolan was.

Basically, what I'm saying here is that the classification for who was "important" to glam rock is right out an impossible category, and that we're best off not quoting Encarta, of all sources. Ultimately, what this article suffers from is the problem with categorizing glam, in that it refers to a very specific movement with very ambiguous criteria. I think what matters most is the influence of one group over another through influence and the basic time period - specifically the first half of the 70's. Not every group with makeup and shoes is glam, but, by contrast, we must remember that if a group did indeed attempt to go with the movement, by God, they were part of the movement! (talk) 07:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

This makes sense to me; Encarta are not specialists in this field, and I propose to rewrite it to more closely follow Allmusic's analysis, which seems to make sense, especially the "disposable pop" vs "art rock" dichotomy. FYI, link is here. Before I do this, any comments? --Rodhullandemu 17:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I remember the Sweet just fine from the 70s. I even played some of their songs in a band I played in. Lots of people knew who they were in the US, and they played them on the radio.
I agree that Gary Glitter had nothing to do with the glitter (not glam) rock movement. DavidRavenMoon (talk) 01:12, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Complete Overhaul[edit]

There is a lot of misinformation in this article. It even contradicts itself early on, in the History section, saying: "The first glam rock band was T.Rex with the song "Ride a White Swan" " and then one paragraph later mentioning Space Oddity and two Bowie albums which were released earlier. I'm not an expert on glam; I'm more of a punk expert. But it's clear to me that this article needs a rewrite or an extensive revision. Much of it is heavily biased or just incorrect. And I may be wrong on this, but I believe glam rock started in New York City around Andy Warhol and the Factory, in the late 60s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Space Oddity was most definitely not Glam. It was a hippy song about space travel as metaphor for drugs (á la Hawkwind!) taken from an album of ballady singer-songwriter music performed by a guy in a loose flowery hippy shirt and Bob Dylan perm.
However, you're right in one respect - Ride A White Swan was not Glam - Bolan was still wearing hippy clothes (mostly dungarees) at that point and musically Swan and the T.Rex brown album were not Glam, they were similar to the last Tyrannosaurus Rex album A Beard Of Stars and in fact the brown album was originally going to be the 5th Tyranno LP (talk) 22:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

The Smiths[edit]

How about adding The Smiths on there. Does their music not hint at least some elements of glam rock? :/

"Panic" borrows from "Metal Guru" to my memory, but other then that ehh...I've never really found too much linking them other then Morrissey is a big glam rock fan. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Derivative Forms?[edit]

Most of the things listed in that bit are only partially Glam. That said, I'm not it's completely accurate to call them derivative forms of Glam Rock. (Albert Mond (talk) 03:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC))

Addition of[edit]

I would like to see added to this page as I believe it is a valuable resource specific to the subject. Although I am a member of the site's forum I am not affiliated with it in any way and thus am not seeking to gather links for my own personal site or trying to drum up membership for a social networking site. I found this site while looking for information on the subject myself and found it to be immensely useful. It is a non-profit organization whose purpose is to inform its visitors about glam rock and glam metal. The content is growing day by day and many bands are included in its pages, both major acts and also less well-known performers.

(RetromanThe (talk) 13:36, 27 September 2009 (UTC))

Except that has barely any glam rock content, it's almost all 80s 'glam metal.' Unless things improve, I don't see why it should be listed here.Metalion SOS (talk) 05:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Black Moon[edit]

I've often wondered why this is listed in the movies section, so finally picked it up. Can someone explain what is glam about it? Besides Joe Dallesandro's brief make-over towards the end there's NOTHING. A Clockwork Orange and The Holy Mountain have more glam elements than this and they aren't listed... so I'll remove it, unless someone can point out something I missed..? Metalion SOS (talk) 02:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

American Graffiti[edit]

Could someone explain to me the relevance of American Graffiti (included in the NY Dols para)? Thanks. Wwwhatsup (talk) 18:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Honestly I have read it several times and I have no idea. Perhaps there is some confusion between the graphiti subculture of the period and the film. In any case this is just one of many problems with this article so I am going to open a new section on cleaning up below.--SabreBD (talk) 08:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Clean up[edit]

As the tags on the article observe, and as has been noted many times on this page, the article has a number of major problems, of which a lack of cited sources and a rather idiosyncratic essay style are the most pressing. Usually at this point I offer to do a clean up, finding sources for unsourced statements, removing what cannot be sourced and tidying up the text to make sense. However, this article is so full of the incomprehensible or irrelevant that I am not sure if that could be done. I have a more radical suggestion that we borrow most of the text from the relevant sub-section in rock music article here, which is pretty cogent and is sourced (and which I should say I cleaned-up some time ago) and replace the history section with that. We can then use that as a basis for expansion with additions backed by reliable sources.--SabreBD (talk) 08:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

QUEEN Rock opera is not only Queen's genre (as someone mentioned that!) you could describe them in at least 10 genres. Queen were one of the pioneers of glam rock and they deserve to take a place here in glam rock. And also other bands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:56, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Glam rock[edit]

glam ROCK this rock music genre —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

If you have a point you need to make it clearly and present some evidence from WP:reliable sources.--SabreBD (talk) 20:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


I see the word "movement" used once in the article (but 12 times here at talk, not including me!), but I'm thinking glam, New Romantic etc. were styles, not movements. I'll edit accordingly if I don't get shouted at first...! Nortonius (talk) 17:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with styles. I am really not sure about the music genre part - but there are plenty of sources that use the term and I wouldnt want to remove the genre box without serious consideration. Its a bit clearer with New Romanticism, which is a style and synthpop which is a genre, but even there commentators and editiors disagree.--SabreBD (talk) 18:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Cheers for the response. And, good point about "genre" - on some levels it's synonymous with "style" - but I'm not going to stir that up! I've just read somewhere that using the word "genre" is inherently racist, but it was clearly from an exclusively US POV, and I think it's taking things a bit far to apply it globally. No, it's just that my POV is that the kind of "movement" suggested in its use in this article is a social one, usually with a political or religious focus, so it grates seeing it here - glam might've been liberating, but I'm not convinced it was a movement! In fact, I think I can hear Noddy Holder laughing... "Style" is more neutral in that sense though, I think - and, I'm only proposing to change one word in the article. Nortonius (talk) 19:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I've gone and done it - though, when it came to it, I thought just deleting "movement" and adding an "s" after the wikilink for New Romantic worked better than introducing the word "style" in its place - btw, that NR wikilink is to a redirect, so should be fixed. Then I noticed that the New Romantic article has "movement" in its first sentence...! No, I'm not going for that one too, cba. Nortonius (talk) 18:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Good call. Its a big improvement. Maybe I will have a go at New Romantics when I find my flak jacket.--SabreBD (talk) 18:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! Face-grin.svg (btw give yourself a medal, that's the first time I've felt like using an emoticon anywhere in about two years!) These days, when the flak starts flying, I tend to just run for cover...! Nortonius (talk) 18:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


is punk really a derivative form? i thought it was a reaction against glam (as well as prog) (talk) 20:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I think derivative form is putting it a bit strongly. The relationship is a bit complex. Punk was largely reacting to things like glam, but also shared some of its features. For example Bowie was a major influence on punk. A sourced sentence to explain this is a good idea and I will go look for a source.--SabreBD (talk) 20:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Category articles facilitate and reinforce arbitrary definitions of "glam"[edit]

The category of "Glam rock," with its sub-category of "Glam rock bands," creates a debatable distinction between solo artists and bands.

Also: A significant number of the bands listed in the sub-category were formed in the 1980s, '90s and 2000s – well after the founding era of glam. This undermines the relevance and usefulness of the category.

The separate article List of glam rock artists addresses both of these issues, (1) by including solo artists and bands in the same list and (2) by dividing the list into three sections: "Classic era of glam (1971-1975)," "Post-1975 glam," and "Bands influenced by glam." One could make a case against a number of solo artists and bands being included on these lists. But at least it represents a better attempt to keep things in order.

Of course, because this List of glam rock artists is a list article but not a category, one has to add artists or bands to the list "manually" rather than by using the comparatively "automated" category protocol. By the same token: If it were a category, one would not be able to add an artist or band to a specific section of the list simply by using the category protocol.

Perhaps the answer is to "redraw" the existing categories, replacing the current "Glam rock bands" sub-category with three new sub-categories along the lines of the individual sections in the List of glam rock artists.

Were this done, it still would seem useful to retain the List of glam rock artists, to have one article that puts everything in one place.Johnlumea (talk) 19:05, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Bolan did NOT dress Glam for "Ride A White Swan" - he went Glam on "Hot Love"[edit]

Just to completely demolish the myth that Marc Bolan dressed Glam for T.Rex's Top Of The Pops performance of Ride A White Swan, here is an actual photo of one of the two performances:

As you can see, Marc is wearing just a pair of denim dungarees over his bare torso, nothing remotely Glam. It was a look he'd often worn during his late 60s hippy days. I've seen photos of the other TOTP appearance although I can't find any online, but he just wore a dark-coloured T-Shirt with a zigzag motf across the chest and corduroy flares. Again, not Glam. No footage exists of either TOTP appearance, but here is a French TV appearance from around that same time:

Again note, Bolan is wearing dungarees and a vest, not Glam clothes.

Just to hammer the point home, here are two continental European TV performances from Jan/Feb '71:

Again, note the distinct lack of Glamwear! In one, Marc is wearing a plain white T-shirt, in the other those dungarees again, this time over a rather hippyish flowery shirt.

Bolan only FINALLY went Glam for second hit Hot Love:

Please bear this hard evidence in mind before you re-edit the article again to say than Bolan started dressing Glam for Ride A White Swan. He did not!!! (talk) 21:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I would like to discuss the musical merits of Glam Rock[edit]

There seems to be no reference to the musical aspect of Glam. Is there no belief that it exists? Do people assume glam is fashion? There is a glam revival right now. It is evident in the sound. Listen to Smith Western's album "Dye it Blond" and the Black Keys album "Brothers". Is that not glam influenced? Disregard blues elements - Marc Bolan was well aware of the containment of blues music in his guitar but did not limit it to that attribute- see Jeepster — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

There used to be a section on the musical characteristics, so it should be included again. Those who think glam is just a fashion style clealy haven't heard enough of the genre.Metalion SOS (talk) 04:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I am all in favour, as long as it is reliably sourced.--SabreBD (talk) 08:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Heart[edit]

Heart, as the name of a band, is ambiguous. I was unable to find any reliable evidence that the Canadian group Heart are a glam rock band. There was probably a Dutch glam rock band called Heart, but it was pretty obsure and the source did not look reliable.

So I deleted the text "From this second wave of glam rockers emerged a group of female artists who exemplified the androgynous look and hard-rocking attitude, including Quatro, Joan Jett and the Runaways, and Heart.", plus its associated citation.

The deleted citation was Girls Rock! Fifty Years of Women Making Music. This book's (complete) index can be viewed at Though the index has an entry for "bohemian glam", it does not have an entry for "glam rock".

Please only add Heart back into the article if you can cite a reliable source and disambiguate the name. Peter Loader (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I think its probably a good call. If someone else finds something reliable then, well and good, they can put it back.--SabreBD (talk) 22:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Bad ISBN for The Runaways[edit]

The reference (currently number 13):

"P. Auslander, Performing Glam Rock: Gender and Theatricality in Popular Music (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2006), ISBN 0-7546-4057-4, pp. 222-3."

has an ISBN that links to Performance And Popular Music: History, Place And Time by Ian Inglis. Peter Loader (talk) 08:34, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that, I will look into it.--SabreBD (talk) 09:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

During London Olympic beginning Mud was among the very few bands that was shown. By wikipedia Mud is not worthy to mention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:04, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

The Man Who Sold the World[edit]

Why isn't The Man Who Sold the World mentioned? It was realeased in November 1970 and is widely accepted as the first Glam rock album ever. So why isn't it even mentioned here??? Bolan found his influence through Bowie, as he had previously been part of his band. The album cover shows Bowie dressed in a dress. Isn't that typically Glam? The album was even banned by the capitalist regime in the United States as a result of the gender-bending cover! "T-Rex formed Glam rock..." BULLSHIT! The Man Who Sold the World should have been mentioned here... it's not mentioned ONE TIME AT ALL! Several of the songs there clearly have Glam rock-like characteristics. Why isn't it mentioned? If we should believe the article, Bowie didn't play Glam rock before Ziggy. OK, I would call Queen Bitch from Hunky Dory pretty typical Glam rock song, yet, if we believe this article, Bowie didn't play Glam until Ziggy. Two of his greatest hits, Changes and Life on Mars?, both from his 1971 album Hunky Dory stay described as Glam rock in the infoboxes of their respective articles. But why is it here described like if he didn't play Glam rock until Ziggy Stardust? I think The Man Who Sold the World is absolutely notable to mention, as it is often described as the first Glam rock album ever. How Bowie look at the cover, is around as typically Glam rock as it may become! So there's the glam image. The musical style was "glammy" enough as well. (talk) 12:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources we can use to support those assertions in the text?--SabreBD (talk) 13:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
It's even mentioned in the article: "It has been claimed that this album's release marks the birth of glam rock.[11]" So why isn't it mentioned in the Glam rock article then, it should absolutely be notable? (talk) 14:23, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Do you have access to that source and know exactly what it says?--SabreBD (talk) 18:21, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Derivative forms[edit]

The "Derivative forms" list is, frankly, ridiculous. (talk) 03:36, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Property of no-one[edit]

No-one 'owns' this page or any page in Wikipedia, so users who want to make LEGITIMATE changes or modifications should be allowed to do so without having those changes immediately reversed. And all these idiots who want their favourite performers to be included, regardless of musical style, or who don't want a performer included because he/she is ignorant - they should be the ones blocked, not those trying to elaborate and make the page better.


Could Wizzard be added to the list of performers mentioned in the second paragraph?Vorbee (talk) 16:46, 27 December 2017 (UTC)