Talk:List of alternative rock artists

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

My Chemical Romance[edit]

Please tell me why My Chemical Romance isn't on this list, look at their Wikipedia page, it clearly describes them as such. I know My Chemical Romance is disliked by a lot of people, but the point of this page is to include Bands that are described as such. If you don't believe they shouldn't be on here, give me a reason why and give a better genre to describe them as, and don't say shitty emo or something like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:59, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Alternative or not?[edit]

This list should be on the "Lamest Lists of Wikipedia" list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Many bands have been added to this list that are questionable. While many would almost undisputably be alternative, there are some that I have my doubts on fitting the criteria. I think it would be helpful to look over this list and try to decide if the more questionable additions should be removed or not. -- LGagnon 15:41, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Unless one considers trip-hop a subgenre of alternative rock, it's very weird to see Massive Attack here. _R_ 14:41, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Good point, though there are more in the list that are questionable. Some are from different types of rock music, and others have been mislabeled as being alternative. Those are the ones that I'm really concerned about. -- LGagnon 21:28, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Generally I think you are doing a pretty good job of editing what is & isn't alternative rock, everyone would agree Joy Division are alternative but a lot of people would not consider Tori Amos to be the same. So I guess it would have to come down to mass consensus/broad interpretation on what is & isn't.

I seriously don't think, after much consideration, that Joy Division belongs on this list. The band was firmly punk/post-punk and broke up in 1980. Therefore, they really have no direct connection to what would become alternative rock, unlike post-punk contemporaries The Cure, the Banshee, Echo & the Bunnymen, and so on, who we able to develop throughout the 80's. However, I added New Order to this list a while back, and they certainly belong here. WesleyDodds 10:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I would like to make it clear on the main page that the word 'alternative' should not imply 'underground', so there's no need to worry about a very successful alternative rock band being listed. As long as it isn't standard ROCK, but comes under some other subgenre of 'rock' (therefore making it an alternative to the basic, standard, 'rock', i.e. successful punk-rock bands are no less 'alternative' than underground punk-rock bands. It is the fact that they are important to their own subgenre of rock that should qualify their listing. Bethgranter 15:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with LGagnon alot of bands need to be moved from the list. Mark321123 13:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

To add to this, why are bands such as Fallout Boy and Greenday on this list? They are clearly more towards punk than anything, more specifically pop punk.

How about Linkin Park? After the release of their new album "Minutes To Midnight" their sound has changed to a more alternative sound so why not add them specifying that after "Minutes To Midnight" they have a more alternative sound.

No. Who says (aside from the band, which is not a reliable source) that they are alt-rock right now? That sounds like original research. WesleyDodds 06:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

WESLEYDODDS! It's not original research, it's just so obvious that most people don't really feel they need to list a source because sources are every freaking where. AND WHAT?!?!?! If the band isn't a source, than what the HECK IS? Your opinion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 00:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I found other bands that are considered alternative that plays punk music, Bodyjar[1], The Explosion[2], and Bracket (band). They sound like an alternative rock band. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joel T135 (talkcontribs) 11:23, 7 July 2014 (UTC)



I'm not so sure U2 belongs on this list. Can anyone varify that they do? -- LGagnon 21:14, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

The fact you are even debating if U2 should be on this list worries me.

Oasis & Offspring do NOT belong on this list either, these two bands are top 40 mainstream rock, they are the virtual personifaction of the top 40 genre If they are going to remain on this list we might as well add Phil Collins, Spin Doctors, Creed, Live etc.

And please explain why Devo & New Order were removed & these two bands(above) were returned to the list. --

You know, there really hasn't been any attempt to give a strict definition of what bands belong on this list and which don't. Some people do consider Oasis & Offspring alternative, even though they don't belong on the list. And people keep on adding bands that, IMO, don't belong and don't fit a strict definition of alternative. Maybe we should decide on such a definition? -- LGagnon 04:01, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)

Shouldn't any band which has its own wiki on wikipedia and either lists alternative rock in its genre section OR lists genres which are in turn listed as subgenres of alternative rock on the alternative rock wiki, be listed? Couldn't this provide a clear cut decision? (Since only notable bands are allowed wikis anyway, and whatever genre they belong to is discussed on their particular band wiki pages).Bethgranter 15:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Yet another useless list[edit]

Without defining criteria for "alternative", this list is beyond useless. I sympathise with LGagnon above, struggling to decide whether U2 are or are not "alternative". U2 definitely arose out of the indie scene in the UK, and their music is not wholly conventional rock, but how much more mainstream than U2 can you get. I flicked through it and I thought, a/ this list is a bit on the short side!, b/ where are Joy Division, Black Flag, Big Black, the Gurge, the Go-Betweens, Mogwai, Godspeed YBE, etc etc etc, c/ Toad the Wet Sprocket? Hootie and the Blowfish? What are they the alternative to exactly? Rug trophies?! Hello? And who is going to look up a list of alt bands to track down articles? I could understand if it were tacked on to a history of... article but as it stands, just another absolutely useless list.Dr Zen 07:45, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This list isn't useless. True, it needs improvement, but it does help find articles on artists in the genre, as well as suppliment the article on the genre. Maybe you don't need it, but others might. And yes, we do have a "history of..."-like article, but that is too big to add this to it. As for what's missing, you can go ahead and add them. -- LGagnon 08:22, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)
You're joking. a/ There are far too many and b/ I'm not interested in fighting over who is or is not alternative (I note that you cut Adam and the Ants -- unquestionably alternative, have you ever listened to Dirk Wears White Sox? and exactly how many bands do you know of that dress up in pirate costumes and claim to be highwaymen? And how are massive attack out and Bjork in?) and c/ I'd rather work on the content than the metanonsense like this that attaches itself to it. Dr Zen 08:32, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The whole genre of "Alternative" is about as useless as "World Music": a collection of artists that don't fit in any other category. What do artists like Bjork, Nirvana, Soul Couging, They Might Be Giants & Sigur Ros have in common? Why should they all be lumped together in the same genre? Mike3k 21:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Alternative rock is essentially any rock music form that finds its origin in punk rock. Thus, this can be a useful list with a defined genre. Of course, some artists that don't fit that definition have been considered alt, but that was due to foolish marketing rather than actual merit. Keep in mind, the mainstream music industry marketed anything out of the oridinary as alt rock during the 1990s. Thus, some people who don't belong here will be here even when they are not alternative. -- LGagnon 21:39, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

All American Rejects are as mainstream as it gets. Someone needs to clean this shit up. Gatesofawesome! 15:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Just because a band is mainstream doesn't mean they aren't alternative rock. Ignore the connotations of the word "alternative": above all else this is a music genre classification. I mean, R.E.M., The Cure, and Nirvana all had Top Ten hits after spending years in the underground. WesleyDodds 08:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Garage rock is not alternative[edit]

People keep on adding garage rock revival bands to this article when they do not belong here. Let's take this into account before we add The Hives, The White Stripes, The Strokes, or any other garage rock revival acts in here again. -- LGagnon 19:09, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I agree, although these bands maybe alternative as well as Garage, Garage is a more appropriate category for these bands & describes their style better than just alternative. Khanada July 15, 2005

It depends. Garage rock revival bands may be simply that: garage rock revival bands. But bands that establish their careers in the indie underground scene and have definite roots in alternative rock styles and artists (such as the Strokes and White Stripes) do belong here, or at least in a list of indie rock artists. WesleyDodds 01:58, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Anyone ever think that Garage could just be like sub genre of Alternative? Or is it just a sub of rock?

It's a subgenre of rock in general. It's been around since the 1960s. WesleyDodds 00:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Punk and New Wave[edit]

User: just added a bunch of punk and new wave bands to the list. Should we keep these, or do they belong in their own list? Many of these don't seem to fit what would normally be called "alternative". -- LGagnon 01:53, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Let me ask you, do you think some groups can be on two lists? I don't see why not. User talk:Khanada 02:00 August 04, 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think they should be listed here, so good, even though they are not listed as subgenres of alternative rock on the main 'alternative rock' wiki page (but I think that's wrong too!)Bethgranter 16:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

It's a case-by-case basis. A band like the The Cure can be classified as numerous genres, and many punk bands in America evolved into an alternative rock sound. But punk and New Wave don't belong as subgenres of alternative; it's a classification sometimes used when discussing the topic of alternative by itself, but such a classification ignores the differences and relations between the genres, and sources that consider the entire history of rock music don't group them together. Because, really, New Wave by and large has nothing to do with alternative rock; they developed along different paths. Not to mention there's just as many people who if they're going to group it all together are more prone to call everything "punk" instead of "alternative". WesleyDodds 04:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

More misinformation from useless editors & the destruction of this article[edit]

This article is being destroyed. It's now one of those articles that proves Larry Sanger right when he said that Wikipedia sucks because expertise is not respected. So many bands that never deserved the title of alternative or ever came close to being alternative are constantly added to this list. When I started this list, real alternative bands were added with consideration for whether or not they do count taken when adding them. Now, people who don't know anything about music are ruining this article. It's becoming a lost cause because of the rampant lack of education and expertise (and in some cases, common sense) amongst the editors of Wikipedia on the subject matter. As it stands, the article doesn't provide what it is supposed to. It has become the embodiment of Wikipedia's lack of knowledgable editors, and unwillingness to respect them. -- LGagnon 03:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Please clarify with examples WesleyDodds 06:46, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I see what you're talking about now. But that's more an issue of people screwing around rather than a deliberation on whether or not certain artists listed belong in the Alternative genre. I did re-add the disputed accuracy tag when I did a revert in order to clean up some of the vandalism you missed, but I really don't think it's necessary to tag this page as such. The issue is people acting like jerks. If people keep vandalising the page, I'll just fix it right back, no problem. WesleyDodds 06:55, 4 November 2005 (UTC)


Alternative rock? Or not?

I'd say yes, but only tentatively. WesleyDodds 10:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

M.I.A. as alternative rock? Are you nuts? Geez, if M.I.A. is alternative rock then Linkin Park obviously alternative rock. You're nuts for saying yes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 00:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Wut the Hell?[edit]

Why are the All American Rejects on this page?

Well, they're not a punk band, so they belong here. WesleyDodds 04:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

just b/c the 'rejects have more hits than most alternative bands doesn't mean they're not alternative, too.

Alternative or not alternative?[edit]

Would System of a Down, Good Charlotte, Avril Lavigne, or Avenged Sevenfold count as alternative rockers? And if any of them, which ones?--Mr. Brain 04:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

SoaD is nu-metal. Avril is pop. Can't remember what the other 2 sound like, but as far as I remember I wouldn't count them either. -- LGagnon 15:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the following artists can be in the list: Linkin Park, Keane, maybe Korn, Avril Lavigne, and The Fray. -- Angel of the Will 13:42, 23 February 2007 (GMT-3)

Of those listed, only Keane and the Fray belong. WesleyDodds 21:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I second WesleyDodds's opinion, since Linkin Park and Korn are nu metal, Bendulum 21:34, 05 April 2007 (UTC)

What's going on here?[edit]

Why didn't anyone put Type O Negative or Porcupine Tree on the list? If Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Tool, R.E.M. and Smashing Pumpkins can make the list, then I can add Porcupine Tree & Type O Negative.--Mr. Brain 17:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't knwo who Porcupine Tree are. Type O Negative seem to fit pretty well under heavy metal. WesleyDodds 21:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Porcupine Tree is an alternative/progressive hard rock band from England. If you haven't already, buy their latest album ''Deadwing''. It's a great album.--Mr. Brain 02:56, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

And one more thing...[edit]

And one more thing. Type O Negative may be metal, but they're also alternative metal. If they're gothic or alternative, they can't be deleted. And Phish is alternative rock, too. Thank you--Mr. Brain 16:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not so sure this "alternative metal" is actually an alt rock genre. From what I've seen of bands that get this odd label, they are always much more metal than alt. I'm removing them again until you can give a better justification. -- LGagnon 21:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

How about this. The Cure & Siouxsie & the Banshees are considered gothic rock. Robert Smith & Siouxsie to my understanding have gothic-like vocals. Gothic is a subordinate of alternative rock. Now Type O Negative is said to be a gothic rock band. Peter Steele employs gothic/vampire vocals. That means they're also an alternative band. Therefore, they belong in this category. Is this a better explanation?--Mr. Brain 20:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Vocals aside (which are not the only reason The Cure & Siouxsie get the gothic label), the rest of the music is metal. Maybe they have "gothic" looks, but so does Slayer by some accounts. -- LGagnon 22:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, fine, I don't have a problem with Type O Negative not being on the list. But why do you have Lacuna Coil on it? I mean, think about it. They're more metal than alternative. So they shouldn't be on the list.--Mr. Brain 15:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Response- Type O Negative is not goth rock, they are goth metal. Goth metal takes more influence from death-doom metal than goth rock. So therefore, they by no means are an alternative rock band. As for Lacuna Coil, I guess they probably should not be there either.

why does the list[edit]

include almost all conceivable mainstream rock performer of today? are blink 182 and tori amos "alternative rock"? by definition, almost a majority of the performers on here are the antitheis of "alternative"- the commercial, mainstream artists. if the term carries so little weight, how about we just delete the damn thing or only inlcude bands that exemplify old school alternative rock. 23:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

When using "alternative" as a genre term ever since the 1990s, the mainstream presence of an artist has largely been irrelevant. Otherwise we'd be taking half the bands off this list, and seminal ones to the genre, too. And keep in mind bands that a lot of these bands broke through from the underground into the mainstream and managed to stick around (one notable example being R.E.M.) WesleyDodds 00:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I second that. Many of these bands started out underground, and the fact that they achieved notoriety doesn't change what genre of music they played. Onikage725
I BELIEVE THAT A PAGE ABOUT MODERN MUSIC SHOULD BE ABOUT MODERN MUSIC NOT HOW IT WAS DEFINED IN 1990. WHAT DO YALL THINK? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Well I plan on getting rid of a major part of the bands in this list (because they are NOT alternative rock) unless some of the opposing people participate in talks and we come to a conclusion. The list is outrageous. The first to go will be 311, AFI, and Tori Amos. Mark321123 13:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Uh, no. All three of those belong. WesleyDodds 01:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

red links[edit]

there is a great deal of red links of questionable unknown bands on the list that may be spam

"The Electric Jets, Evansblue , The Motion Sick , Nerveline , New Season, Oscar Trim, P, Perpetua , Platinum Head, Ribbed 4 Her Pleasure, Royal Fanclub, Splinter, Th' Faith Healers, Unstep, Until Escape, Zach Hoel and the Flawless Victories, and Zephoria."

can anyone account for these bands?

--Pantophobia 06:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

The only one I can account for is Th' Faith Healers, which I added and have been meaning to make an article for. They put out a collection of their Peel Sessions about a year ago, and you can find them listed on Allmusic. WesleyDodds 22:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


I just removed several redlinks. If I made a mistake and removed a notable band that just happens not to have an article yet, let me know. The first step to including a notable band on this list should be (ideally) to create an article for them if one doesn't exist. janejellyroll 02:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

maybe a clean-up is needed?[edit]

This is a list of alt rock bands, but I see in the list also bands from other genres like post rock, dark-wave, trip hop, indie, even metal and gothic... we should clean up the list. What do you think? Connacht 17:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Goth, post-rock and "indie" are alternative rock genres. WesleyDodds 17:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

The Feeling[edit]

Shouldn't The Feeling be in this list too? I think they're kinda alternative...

the feeling is classical rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


Someone keeps adding Tool to the list, which is ridiculous. They are considered by some to be an Alternative Metal band, but they are the furthest thing from Alternative Rock. People with no understanding of musical genres should not be editing the list. Osmodius 07:33, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Response- Faith No More is on the list, so I don't see why we can't add more alt-metal bands.

Linkin park?[edit]

The article Linkin Park states in its genres that Linkin Park is Alternative Rock, Nu-metal, Rapcore.

Even the article Alternative Rock states Linkin Park as one of Alternative Rock Bands!

So why not include them? --~KnowledgeHegemony~ 18:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added them to the list, if anyone has a problem with that they can take it to the Linkin Park discussion page, as their primary genre is listed there as Alternative Rock. Osmodius 10:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

WesleyDodds keeps on taking Linkin Park off the list, that's why they're never on the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 00:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

If Sonic Youth..[edit]

If Sonic Youth are on there, should Ciccone Youth not be put on there as well? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ALCUS36 (talkcontribs) 21:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

All Music Guide[edit]

Seeing as you seem to control this page, Wesley, I really am getting tired of war-ing with you. So I'll make my peace and say one last time that you can't trust one website for every musical band in existance. When it comes to the fans, they tend to know the music best. I agree that industrial rock is a form of alternative rock reason for why I left Nine Inch Nails unaltered.

Einstürzende Neubauten however is industrial music which is experimental and sometimes even electronic.
Ministry is an industrial metal, still not industrial rock.
Nitzer Ebb? An EBM band, why were they ever considered rock when EBM is industrial dance music?

If you keep re-adding these bands then what stops you from adding SPK, Coil, Test. Dept, KMFDM etc.? Every musical band is alternative rock, when you put it that way. (Skinnydrifter (talk) 12:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC))

First off, "Seeing as you seem to control this page" is not a comment that assumes good faith. Ignoring that, All Music is one of the more reliable music sources. Given the difficulty in defining industrial music as a whole (I've read many sources that make no distinction between "industrial music" and "industrial rock"), I'm willing to conceed Einstürzende Neubauten and Nitzer Ebb to an extent (although Einstürzende Neubauten's later material does get into more standard rock formats, but whatever . . .) but Ministry is consistenly referred to specifically as an alternative rock band. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and yeah, KMFDM would belong here. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
KMFDM would actually fit here, so that was a bad example. Apologies for the rudeness. (Skinnydrifter (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2008 (UTC))

Would you stop doing that?[edit]

Before you badmouth me for wanting to add Tool to this list, let me just point something out. Faith No More, Jane's Addiction, Rage Against the Machine, Finger Eleven, and Breaking Benjamin are on this list of alternative rock bands. Also, someone said it was OK to add a few more alt-metal bands(not all of them, but some true alternative bands). In other words, would you please stop deleting Tool from this list? Thank you. Mr. Brain (talk) 04:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Tool aren't alt-rock. This has been brought up both here and on the Tool talk page. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park is indeed Alternative Rock[edit]

"Hybrid Theory" may not be an alternative rock album, but it certainly does have some alternative sounding songs, such as Pushing Me Away, My December, and Runaway. "Meteora" might not be an alternative rock album either, but they do have some songs of that genre: Somewhere I Belong, Easier To Run, Faint, Breaking The Habit, and Numb. And to say that Chester Bennington screams in a few songs, doesn't make them Screamo. And to say the Mike Shinoda raps, doesn't make them Hip Hop. The Red Hot Chili Peppers singer raps in a few of his songs, they're not Nu Metal, now are they? Then, Linkin Park's "Minutes To Midnight" is Alternative Rock. Now who in their logical mind can argue that Linkin Park is not alternative rock? I will check this article every single day to make sure that they are considered Alternative Rock. Why? Because I'm right, and Wikipedia users need to make the best logical choices. If you keep on taking down Linkin Park, I will take down the Red Hot Chili Peppers, or any other band that has rapping style vocals and electric guitars. Unless there is clear evidence, in the definition of what an Alternative Rock band "isn't", then I will keep on making sure Linkin Park is on the list. Thank you so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 16:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park aren't alternative rock. They're a nu metal band.

WesleyDodds (talk) 06:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park "was" a Nu-Metal band. Their newer albums Minutes to Midnight, A Thousand Suns, and Living Things are all indeed Alternative. I have added Linkin Park to the list, and unless you have a Legitimate reason, don't remove them.

Excuse me. A few Hybrid Theory songs sound alternative. A few Meteora songs sound alternative. AND, Minutes to Midnight is Alternative rock. Hmmm..., I will keep on adding Linkin Park to the list. So, have fun keeping up with me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 21:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

"A few songs sound alternative". According to who? What do you mean by "sound alternative"? WesleyDodds (talk) 21:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Lets see... Runaway, In The End, Pushing Me Away, My December, Somewhere I Belong, Easier To Run, Breaking The Habit, Numb, and the entire Album of Minutes To Midnight. And when I say "sound"... that means it's hard to put a genre on any particular hybrid theory or meteora song because Linkin Park sort of invented their own sound. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 21:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

And Crawling is also considered an Alternative Rock song, which won a grammy for best rock song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 21:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

None of your assertations are based on reliable, verifiable sources. And it's irrelevant that one of their songs won a Grammy for best rock song. This topic has come up before elsewhere; Linkin Park isn't alternative rock. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes they are dude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 03:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Portishead is primarily trip hop, but they are on this list. Nine Inch Nails are primarily Industrial Rock, but they are on the list. Alien Ant Farm isn't even considered Alternative Rock, but they are on the list. The Arctic Monkeys are post-punk revival and indie rock, but they are on the list. Blink 182 is punk, but they are on this list. Bloc Party is indie rock and post-punk revival. LINKIN PARK, however, is primarily an Alternative Rock band (look it up on their page), and you're saying that they're NOT Alternative Rock? That doesn't make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 04:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Professionally speaking, if anyone has a problem with Linkin Park being considered Alternative Rock, then you should probably go to the Linkin Park discussion page. JCStreetSoldier1234 (talk) 04:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park is not primarily an alternative rock band; they are a nu metal band. The genres of other bands on this list is irrelevant to the discussion (by the way those are all alt-rock bands; the only ones I would question are Portishead and Blink-182). Unless you back up your argument with sources, Linkin Park doesn't belong here. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC) chew on this for a while then come back with a legitimate reason to remove them — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Here is a source. "Linkin Park". click on it, and look at their genre... their genre IS ALTERNATIVE ROCK as their primary genre. However, Linkin Park being Alternative Rock barely needs a source, it's almost common sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 05:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't use itself as a source. And no, it's not common sense. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Even though Linkin Park is famous for making radio-friendly Nu Metal songs, doesn't make them stuck in that genre. They are a hybrid band of many genres including: Alternative Rock, Alternative Metal, Rap Rock, Rap Metal, Rapcore, Nu Metal, Synth Rock and Alternative Hip Hop. But to say that they're not Alternative Rock would be to say that they're not Nu Metal. In fact, they've had just as many or more alternative rock songs than nu metal songs. So, please stop taking them off the list. Discuss this topic at the Linkin Park discussion page. Maybe on the way to the discussion page you'll see that they're an alternative rock band... hmmm... then maybe I will stop having to add them to this list... I guess I just want wikipedia to be accurate, not bias. If anything, you should have a source. And you wont find one, because Alternative Rock is listed as a genre at Linkin Parks wikipedia page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 05:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

OK... Chew on this source for a while...

Linkin Park is officially Alternative Rock because the OFFICIAL Linkin Park myspace labels it as Alternative Rock (not) Nu Metal. Come on dude, you can't argue with an OFFICIAL Linkin Park page. It's not like a fan made it, it's the real deal. So, if you disagree with me, you're also disagreeing with Linkin Park themselves. You thinking they're not Alternative Rock is your OPINION. Me thinking they are Alternative Rock is indeed my OPINION. But their opinion is trump over your opinion. Therefor, whether or not you disagree with me (and Linkin Park) it doesn't alter the FACT that they make alternative rock music. It doesn't alter the fact that they label themselves (and I have solid evidence) as Alternative Rock. But wait.... there's more.. Like in the movies the villian always comes back to life for one more scare, so I'm gonna nip this argument in the butt.

This shows Linkin Park as a Alternative Rock Band.... Well, now you're arguing against well... professionals. Oh, and here's another source...

Ok... I have definitely won this argument in boastful glory. Stand down and step aside. I will add Linkin Park to this list, and they should stay there. It doesn't matter what your OPINION is, as it doesn't matter what my opinion is either.. I have 3 sources, 1 from Linkin Park themselves, 1 from the american music awards, and 1 from professional music critics.JCStreetSoldier1234 (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC) is not a reliable source; and the band itself isn't either when it comes to categorising genre. An award nominee listing is also unreliable, because it's in the interest of the award committee to expand the criteria of "alternative rock" to fit as many bands as possible. Its unclear how the Metacritic source's genre was arrived at, and anyway, "alternative, rock" is not the same as "alternative rock". CloudNine (talk) 09:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

You guys are so bias, no offense. The fact of the matter is... You don't want Linkin Park on your list (for whatever reason). Stop being so opinionated. It's like saying Jay-Z doesn't make Hip Hop music. It'sl ike saying Michael Jordan was never a basketball player unless I found a reliable source... But, come on. You guys are so weird about this topic, and this debate is my source to back up that factual statement. From now on, I'm going to start taking down bands that are not any more alternative rock as Linkin Park.. You guys need some sources to back up your opinions because I've got an ocean full of info to back up LP being Alt. Rock. I bet you anything you wont find evidence thats as reliable as my evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talkcontribs) 19:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The thing, it would be pretty easy to find a reliable source that said Michael Jordan played basketball (try the New York Times). Can I see this ocean-full of information? The sources you've supplied so far aren't too reliable. The onus is on you to prove Linkin Park is alternative rock, since you're the one that wants to include the band. CloudNine (talk) 00:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

WTF, they are alternative rock, especially Miutes To Midnight. Myspace is reliable because the band cites themselves. Oh, and look at All Music Guide —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

First Hybryd Theory has nothing to do with alternative rock. The genre on that album is rap metal, nu metal and alternative metal but the songs Easier to Run and Breaking the Habit is alternative rock. Minutes to Midnight is alternative rock with exception of Given Up, No More Sorrow, Bleed It Out and No Roads Left and allmusic guide and is a reliable source. --Alive Would? Sun (talk) 12:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

If you don't think Linkin Park is alternative rock then you need your head examined. I'm listening to Crawling while writing this statement and of course they're alternative rock. Just cause a lot of there songs are played on Top 40 and Pop radio and because they are considered Nu Metal doesn't mean they aren't alternative rock cause my band has 3 genres so a band can have more than one genre

They are alternative rock!

--Zach Attack M168.12.133.30 (talk) 21:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

This page is bad[edit]

All it does is make people argue. Also, please tell me a rock band that Nickelback is alternative to. (talk) 19:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

"Also, please tell me a rock band that Nickelback is alternative to." - Every good band there is. -- (talk) 16:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I have to concur. This list is totally absurd. The spectrum of music is so broad these days, trying to fit a band/musician into a tidy slot is nigh impossible. The mere fact that so many wildly differing styles of music have all been given the blanket label of "Alternative Rock" would seem to make it's invalidity plain. Tori Amos, R.E.M., Ministry, Nickelback... They all have totally different music styles. You folks can keep calling them all alternative if you like, but that's not going to make it true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


WTF? Tokio Hotel? Alternative Rock??? They're just shit! And so tell me why a punk rock band like The Offspring should be an Alternative Rock band and Three Days Grace not. This article is ready for dying!

Tokio Hotel is the German version of the Jonas Brothers. There is absolutely nothing "alternative" about them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ParadoxBacklash (talkcontribs) 15:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Advice for Cleaning Up[edit]

If anyone plans on cleaning up the list, I'd like to suggest refraining from adding artists that can be easily classified as one specific genre. For example, Ministry is widely identified by the consensus as an industrial metal band, 3 Doors Down a post-grunge band, and The Offspring a pop-punk band. Try shortening the list down to artists that don't have specific genres going for them (Radiohead, The Flaming Lips, Anberlin) or have an outstanding importance to the development of Alt history despite being called other genres (R.E.M., Sonic Youth, Nirvana, The Cure). As for artists that can be called radio alternative bands (Nickelback), they can be linked via a "See Also: post-grunge, britpop, etc". Otherwise, it might be best to limit the list to notable alternative acts. BreakerLOLZ (talk) 15:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


What's up with this cat? Who does he think he is? I spent quite a bit of time adding new bands to the list and this clown went through and removed every single one of them, and replaced them with crappy, mainstream radio pop that isn't the slightest bit alternative in any sense of the word. How about this, man. Leave my edits alone and keep your crappy kiddie-pop bands off the list. The list doesn't need to be comprehensive, but it should at least be accurate.

Bands that are NOT alternative:

  • Creed
  • Nickelback
  • My Chemical Romance
  • Tokio Hotel
  • 3 Doors Down
  • The Academy Is
  • The All American Rejects
  • All Time Low
  • Hootie & The Blowfish
  • Matchbox 20
  • Alanis Morissette
  • Panic At The Disco
  • The Rasmus
  • The Used
  • Cinema Bizarre

These bands do not belong anywhere near this list, and if you honestly believe that they do, you don't know a damn thing about music. Even at the height of alternative's mainstream popularity in the mid 90's, nobody with more than two brain cells ever considered Alanis or Hootie to be anything other than mainstream corporate pop music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ParadoxBacklash (talkcontribs) 13:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Without discussing the merits of particular artists, I strongly advise you to consider wikipedia standards regarding civility and personal attacks before making any further comments like the above. Also, given the inherently contentious questions about whether or not particular bands/genres belong here, and the constant additions of bands that don't belong, it is a minor miracle any experienced editor bothers to police this article at all. I suspect you would find it in far worse shape without WesleyDodds' efforts. --CAVincent (talk) 04:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I doubt it could get much worse than it already is. This is quite literally, one of the worst genre lists on wikipedia, thanks in no small part to the extremely ill informed and misguided efforts of Mr. Dodds. ParadoxBacklash (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
For starters, Nickelback, Matchbox 20, Creed are post-grunge. Sure they suck and are very mainstream, but they are still alt-rock groups. That applies to the rest. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Ignoring the fact that post-grunge is not "alt-rock" in any way, that doesn't answer the question of why you removed all of my edits, which added a good number of actual alternative bands, apparently just because you've never heard of them. Proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you know a lot less about music than you claim to. How about a compromise? You leave my edits alone, leave the bands I added in place, and go ahead and add your tacky, non-alternative corporate crap-rock back to the list and I won't delete them. ParadoxBacklash (talk) 14:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Post-grunge is indeed an alt-rock subgenre; sources are unanimous on this. Not to be blunt, but I have a pretty indepth knowledge of the genre, as my years of work on Wikipedia can assest to. We can't add every alt-rock band here, only seminal ones. And a few you've tried to add (Evanesence) aren't al-rock at all. Also, you've been formatting links incorrectly (remove underscores and alphabetize solo artists by last name, not first). WesleyDodds (talk) 04:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Whoa, whoa, whoa son. I did NOT add Evanescence, I added stuff like Pylon and Julian Cope. Maybe I've been formatting links incorrectly. My bad. Fix it instead of deleting it. Every single thing I have added is indeed alternative. And how the HELL are Nickelback, Matchbox 20 or My Chemical Romance "seminal" in the slightest? They're derivative crap, none of them have done anything original or influential. I think you need to look up what the word seminal actually means. Now on to my next point. What exactly is post-grunge an alternative to? Do you understand where the term alternative came from originally? If watered down, boring, vanilla garbage like Nickelback is "alt rock", what do you consider just rock? Nickelback has more in common with mainstream rock bands like AC/DC or Forgeigner than they do with The Pixies, Sonic Youth, or even Nirvana. Aside from the fact that the term alternative has been essentially meaningless since about 1994, why don't you explain that one to me. About the "We can't add every alt-rock band here, only seminal ones", did you miss where I said, the list doesn't need to be comprehensive, but it should be accurate? Yeah, well the way you've got it, it's about as far from accurate as it can get. ParadoxBacklash (talk) 12:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

lol Wesleydodds is still at it. I remember butting heads with him a few years back. He's a know-it-all and this alternative rockband list is destined to suck for the rest of eternity. Because I bet he sits down and stares at this list all the time. And Linkin Park is Alternative Rock, Wesley. Especially now more than ever. I'm adding them.

Some criteria[edit]

There are no clear criteria for inclusion on this list, although clearly some regular editors are working to some reasonable boundaries, so in an attempt to nudge toward producing something rather more meaningful perhaps we can discuss agreeing some of the following:

  • Artists must be notable, so no red links,
  • Alternative rock began in the 1980s, so acts that ended before that should not be included (but acts that carried on might be),
  • Artists should be described as "alternative" on their article page, or
  • Artists should be described as "alternative", or as a member of one of the sub-genres of Alternative rock (as listed in that article infobox/alternive rock template at the bottom of the page).

Opinions welcome.--SabreBD (talk) 09:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Red links are allowed in list articles, for lacking an article does not automatically make a subject non-notable. Also, alt-rock consolidated as a unique genre in the 1980s, but a few key acts (Husker Du, Replacments, Bauhaus, the Cure, etc.) were formed in the tail end of the 1970s. These acts generally started out as punk or post-punk and then helped create alternative rock. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Post punk groups that helped found alternative but started out as punk or post-punk would be covered by the "acts that carried on" part of the sentence.
It is fine to accept red links, but that does raise a question about sources. If there is an article for a band their genre can be checked against that, if they don't have one obviously that can't be done. Perhaps then we could ask for a reference in this article for red linked bands. Really it would be best if every band had a note, but I am just not sure it is practical given the size of the list.--SabreBD (talk) 13:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
There must be a source for red link articles.
Since most music artist articles are poorly or non sourced fan articles the Wikipedia article for that act must have reliable sourcing that specifically mentions alternative rock or one of its sub-genres.
If you implement these standards be prepared that nearly if not every day editors who are for the most part non users will add items that violate them. That is how it is with the synthpop and the New Wave lists and those categories are much smaller then alternative rock. Which is why I don't edit here.
Good luck!!! Edkollin (talk) 18:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok do we have consensus on a guideline that says:

  • Acts must either have a reliable source here, or at their article page, which is reliable, verifiable and clearly describes them as alternative rock or one of its sub-genres.

That should deal with the "starting in the 1980s" problem too.--SabreBD (talk) 21:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Hootie and the Blowfish[edit]

Since Hootie and the Blowfish still remains on this list after all this various brouhaha...well....I don't even know what to make of that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

That group is noted by Allmusic in its Adult Alternative Pop/ Rock article a label it described as a branch of alternative rock[1]. We do have a separate list for that Edkollin (talk) 16:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


The fact that AFI is an alternative rock band has been stated in a majority of wikipedia articles pertaining to them. In fact thier own wikipedia page also states that they are an alternative rock band. Therefore, shouldn't they be added to the list ? LPfreak101 (talk) 13:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

I strongly agree with this proposition. The band has very strong punk roots, and though their musical style has changed alot, they still manage to be labelled as 'Alternative' by reviewers and bands alike for their diversity and uniqueness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Linkin Park[edit]

Okay, seriously, Linkin Park may have been Nu Metal at the beginning of their career, but they're Alternative Rock now. Geez, barely any of these bands deserves to be on this list, and if they are on this list, well Linkin Park needs to be too. The editors of this page are making editing decisions in poor taste and I don't have good faith in them. Seriously, this is one of the worst pages on Wikipedia just because Wesleydodds (I presume) is an idiot.

Shiny Toy Guns[edit]

I've been trying to add Shiny Toy Guns onto the list for quite some time and every time I add them it is deleted. There is no doubt that STG are alternative; just about every music source there is classifies them as indie/alternative. I'm going to keep putting them on the list no matter how many times it gets deleted until someone can provide me with a good explanation as to why they don't belong on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Their wiki page lists them as "indie/electronica" and their official site describes them as "electronica indie rock". Indie and alternative are NOT the same thing, and electronica while not actually a real genre is also not alternative. You also tend to add them in with a flurry of other non-alternative mainstream crap pop-rock that don't belong on the list, like Paramore and Fall Out Boy. They stay off. Stop adding them. ParadoxBacklash (talk) 13:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay but FYI I never added Paramore or Fall Out Boy.


There are a few errors here and there. I may go through them at some point. --Limxzero (talk) 11:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Adding citations[edit]

With the closure of the discussion on deletion, I am going to start adding citations, starting with the easiest ones. We might also usefully consider how the list is organised and what information to give.--SabreBD (talk) 07:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


This thing where they are Nu metal/rap rock only applies to their first 2 albums. In general they are an Alternative Rock Band. Why would you classify their latest 2 albums Nu Metal/Rap rock? Please stop deleting them from the list since they are in fact Alternative. I mean they are more Alternative then some of the others on the list and those arent removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Handsprime (talkcontribs) 04:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

You are not going to get anywhere appealing to people just to listen to the music. Editors opinions are completely irrelevant to editing Wikipedia. Find reliable sources that say Linkin Park is alternative rock or claim that nu-matel, rap metal etc is part of Alternative Rock. [2] This link goes to a basic outline of the concepts of verifiability and reliable sources with further links to more detailed explanations. Feel free to ask questions. Edkollin (talk) 21:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Linkin park IS Alternative. It is common sense. Their nu metal/rap rock is only for their first 2 albums. Their later albums are Alternative rock. Its like saying Nine Inch Nails has always been Industral Metal when it was only a few albums

So do not delete them or we may have to lock the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Handsprime (talkcontribs) 06:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

You will never never get Linkin Park permanently on this list if you threaten others and insist that because you absolutely know by your superior common sense that they are alternative rock we will throw out 10 years of Wikipedia guidelines that say you must have a reliable source that says they are Alternative Rock. The shame of it is there is a case based on reliable sources that they belong here. You can do this for years somebody is always going to delete your entry. You figure it out or get out of the way if you want to see them have a long term place in the list. (talk) 23:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Bullet for my Valentine[edit]

Although it would be nice, I don't think bullet for my valentine is anywhere close to alternative rock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Guideline Breakers win[edit]

This is what an article looks like when Wikipedia Guidelines are ignored. Everybody here just adds whatever the hell they want. The attitude is I know I am right because it is just so obvious, everybody knows that so and so act is alternative rock, why should I bother bother finding a reliable source?, let somebody else do it if they care so much. BY THE WAY IF IT IS SO OBVIOUS ETC IT SHOULD TAKE ALL OF 5 OR 10 MINUTES TO FIND A RELIABLE SOURCE AND CITE THE ACT. There are editors that really do not know about the guidelines true, but when you see the same acts, many questionable, most not notable added over and over again it is usually vandalism. But shhhh can't say it you got to assume good faith. Good faith has it's place but it has come to be mean bending over backward to ass kiss the vandals or the just plain lazy. As much as I hate to do it I have to give credit where credit is due, these suckers are persistent with special "kudos" to Linkin Park fans. It took years but their persistence has paid off. Those editors who cared about the guidelines many of who have been trying to push back the onslaught sometimes on a daily bases for years have given up and gone home.

Article is getting some editor attention stopping the deterioration but it is still horrible. Edkollin (talk) 22:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Band's that need to be removed[edit]

Mr. Bungle are not an alternative band, they're experimental, and they're not listed as alternative rock on their page, and there are no sources calling them alternative rock other than semi reliable allmusic. Helmet also need to be removed since they're more metal then they are alternative, If Helmet get to stay on this list then so should all the nu metal bands. I call the big one bitey (talk) 9:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Nu Metal/Alt Metal sub-genre of Alternative Rock?[edit]

This has been an argument raging back and forth here for years and if we can ever get a consensus it would make editing a lot easier and make dealing with the acts listed above easier. Enough time has passed to reopen the topic. The argument for inclusion is that Heavy Metal is a form or subgenre of rock, Allmusic and a plenty of reliable sources tell you that. It seems common sense that and Alternative Metal would be a form Alternative Rock. If adding Metal is Alt Rock (grunge) adding dance music is a form of Alt Rock (Acid House) why not Alt Metal's mix of genres? The arguments against are the lack of sourcing specifically saying "Alt Metal" is a form of Alt Rock (In my opinion this is because to the writers it is as obvious as saying the grass is green). The other argument is the original source not is punk but metal. My view leans towered including acts reliable sourced as Alt metal but not nu-metal because the latter at it's core is a rap-metal fusion that is too separated from the punk origins.

As for experimental/all over the place acts Mr. Bungle or Kate Bush what Wikipedia does in put them in every list when they are unique and probably do not belong on any list. In my view if an artist has a one song or an album of a certain genre that does not make them an artist of that genre. Based on several years of editing my view is a fringe view. Edkollin (talk) 22:34, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

seriously if helmet, mr bungle, tool etc. get to stay here because their part of alt metal (a sub-genre of alt rock) then sepultura and korn should get to stay here to.

Rock or not?[edit]

There seems to be a wrong keel on this discussion. The definitions and history of the term "alternative" is clear enough, it was new wave/post punk/goth scene in the 80s (indie) - anyone who has lived the 80s would have no doubt what was alternative to the mainstream- it was this scene. Thats exactly what created the name. But I dont think anyone called it alternative rock? And the greyzone was the synthpop! Depeche Mode, Yazoo, OMD, Human League etc - this came from punk but it became pop and new romance. In theory this list could include Duran, Spandau Ballet, Nena, Frankie, a-ha and Alphaville (and indeed it does include Alphaville?) because they all grew out of new wave via synth pop. But everyone can hear they crossed the line right? Some acts go to and fro - like early Depeche was pure pop - later Dep mode leaned on ... alternative - When alternative became mainstream with OASIS,NIRVANA,BLUR AND RADIOHEAD in the 90s it became an umbrella term for a certain kind of rock that was not classic (like 70s)- but newish (like indie) - it creates a new border in this decade. Now the border is not concerned with "independent" and "punk-derived" as a divider - but simply borders heavy/classic rock on one side (soundgarden) and pop/singersongwriter on the other (Badly Drawn Boy)as a full blooded commercial monster.

Then stuff like emo and nu-metal and mathrock and postrock happens during the 90s. And now the early alternative rock acts like Oasis are perceived as classic rock. Its the way of the world. IMO alternative rock is a 90s phenomena - it was not called alternative rock in the 80s (it was called indie, newwave , collegerock, modern rock) and it had changed its meaning in the noughties. If the list does not want to include all acts inspired by new wave/postpunk - it should center on the 90s scene as an umbrella term for the guitardriven rock of the 90s-early 00´s . And yes bands like Nickelback/GreenDay are as much part of this, as Nirvana - like it or not. They are the new greyzone to pop, seeing as pop has also changed. Avril Lavigne crosses the line right?. So in the 90s the line for non-classic "rockmusic" is between heavy, rock and pop. In the 80s the line for non-classic" rockmusic was between heavy, indie and pop, because rock was classic In this scenario U2 are proto-alternative rock. So be it. Velvet and The New york dolls are protopunk. Finding sources that call U2 alternative rock in 1984, should prove as difficult as finding sources calling Velvet and Bowie for new wave in 1974 right? Or wrong? Check me out Thetrogg (talk) 21:26, 23 January 2013 (UTC).

Mostly agree with the direction you are taking but acts were described as alternative rock and the genre defined in the 1980s by such publications as the LA Times, NY Times, the founder of the New Music seminar. That is sourced in the main Alternative Rock article. Also the histories/retrospectives of the period generally define guitar acts with a indie/punk attitude but willing to accept some 60's influence (exp REM, Smiths Husker Du) reacting against New Romantic/synthpop (acts that used synths in a darker way NIN/later Depeche Mode are considered alt) as the beginning of alt rock. There are complications. Outside of a music journalists/industry alternative rock was not widely used in the 80s, The Classic Alternative radio format has a heavy dose of synthpop. Retrospectives/histories universally claim "college rock" was a term used in the 1980s for what is now Alt/Indie. While a NY Times article talks about alternative rock being popular on the college circuit I have yet to find a 1980s source using the term "college rock".
My view is that we stick to the current reliable consensus for what is/was alternative rock. Radio formats are a marketing tool that are not considered reliable. As noted above this is very complicated and we have not even broached indie rock yet. Edkollin (talk) 09:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Uneducated Author/Miscategorized[edit]

Who ever wrote the alternative band page does not understand genres is probably not well versed in music. Very inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Sweetwater[edit] JustByteMe (talk) 07:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Missing artists[edit]

Is Tracy Bonham or Crash Vegas notable enough to be on the list?Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 21:18, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Johnny Cash's American Recordings Albums[edit]

I went ahead and added Johnny Cash to the list because of his American Recordings albums. If you feel he is not alternative rock then feel free to remove him from the list. 2602:301:7765:5CF0:29C9:EEE4:790A:AB97 (talk) 18:35, 23 June 2016 (UTC)