Talk:Emo (slang)/Archive 1

message: Main article should be emo. Better to expand the emo article rather than create a new article unless there are distinctive 21st century aspects. Use the template  to reference back to emo. --Paul foord 11:34, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This was originally part of the main emo article, which is where I believe it belongs, but somebody deleted all this stuff, put a very subjective summary under the very subjective heading pop hardcore and so I had to salvage this from an earlier edit of the main emo page. I agree with you completely though. --80.4.224.6 03:40, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't make the change but I agree with it. Emo has a very specific path that I talk about in the emo discussion and this page has NOTHING to do with emo. Pop hardcore or popcore is an appropriate term. Listen to this modern emo band (www.hxcmp3.com/bands/1710) and try to tell me that Dashboard Confessional is anywhere near them stylistically. Emo stands for "emotional hardcore" not "emotional." Any band that lacks hardcore therefore is not emo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DFelon204409 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why "21st Century Emo" not [[Emo]] 

message: Wikipedia suggests minimal capitalisation. Suggest moving to "Emo in the 21st century" as it scans better than "21st Century Emo" and also puts emphasis on Emo. --Paul foord 13:43, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalisation of title 

message: From what I've experienced, this is not a derisive remark but is merely a friendly jest. It's used within the emo culture to mock posers, not for irony - saying that it's supposed to be "ironic" implies that all emo kids need to cheer up.
Apart from the way this article appears to be dancing around the fact that emo as a culture and emos as individuals are mocked, I keep reading parts of it that look like they were written by someone who was trying to suppress the urge to make direct insults by being "objective". There are all sorts of vague implications, spurious links, and ambiguous suggestions littering the document which make it difficult to get any kind of useful information out of the article.
This whole thing also needs to be reworked to be less offensive to people within the Emo culture, and more accessible to those who just wish to find out WHY they or others they know are mocked. This article makes no attempt to explain this, and as I said earlier, just dances around the fact that emo is on the recieving end of a lot of hatred.
I personally do not know enough about the subject to make the necessary changes, but I ask that the people who do give it their best shot. --Badharlick 10:50, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheer Up Emo Kid 

message: What are these supposed to mean?:
*"These obscenities are often used by 'purest' metal fans who are only into the screaming side of music" 
*"The reason for the hatred aimed at emo and its fans seems to be that many fans, especially newer ones, are perceived as having a limited knowledge of the bands which influenced the genre, while many of the most successful emo bands are seen as tailoring their music and appearance to maximize mainstream appeal."
*"Another reason is that many "Emo girls" display a strong attraction towards gay or bisexual male activities."
In fact, I will remove them now. For whoever wrote them, please see Wikipedia:Neutral_Point_of_View. --Someone42 11:04, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: This was in the sexist section:
:Examples that have been cited of bitter break-up lyrics that have supposed sexist connotations include:
:*I hope the next boy that you kiss has something terribly contagious on his lips Brand New - Jude Law & A Semester Abroad
:*You can lead a whore to water and you can bet she'll drink and follow orders Glassjaw - Pretty Lush 
:Females are stereotypically "the root of all evil" in Emo lyrics. For example, the Taking Back Sunday song 'You're So Last Summer' includes the line "the truth is you could slit my throat, and with my one last gasping breath, I'd apologise for bleeding on your shirt".
This is just wrong, even if I like all the above songs/bands and song lyrics. Reasons are:
*GlassJAw _not_ a "21st Century Emo" band.
*The quote from You're So Last Summer is a metaphor - it doesn't say she's evil, just that the guy is obsessed with her. In the same song he says "Cause I'm a wishful thinker with the worst intentions" which might make the lyrics clearer.
* He guy is angry with a specific girl who is going over to England and feels used. I don't think that's particularly sexist. He's not talking about all girls.
I don't thing specific quotes are a good idea, but even if you want some in the article get some better, more appropriate, ones! --Halo 15:06, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not all emo lyrics say females are the root of all evil. They, to some degree, degrade them, but the line that says "I'd apologize for bleeding on your shirt" only says the writer cares for the girl but the feelings aren't returned by her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.162.142 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "sexist" section 

message: "...expresses emotions beyond traditional punks's limited emotional palette of alienation and rage."
POV! I would hardly argue that punk, even traditional punk, is limited in its emotional scope. If anything, I would argue that punk is more emotional than emo, because it is far more passionate than merely limiting its topics to suburban heartbreak...but that would be POV as well, so I will simply alter that line. :) --Inanechild 02:51, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction Paragraph 

message: Yes they should be merged, who the hell thought it was a good idea to start another article that says EXACTLY the same thing as this?? --Deathrocker 09:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree they should be merged. It's pointless having the same debates in two places. --Mdwh 15:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge debate 

message: Whilst it would be sensible to merge this article in it's awful present condition with the emo (music) article, emo subculture as a widely recognised phonomena can be a separate aritcle. The focus of this separate article would deal primarily with issues such as the history, fashion, behaviour, cultural influences (in which music would get a smaller mention than at present), public perception (sterotypes), related subcultures. In short, an article that goes into the same kind of objective depth and detail as, say, the chav article as an example. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MysteryMan (talk • contribs) 22:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  two separate 'emo' articles is plausible 

message: And that brings us to, why so much attention yet so small a page? Instead of complaining about POV contribute to the article, then complain about it! Not to mention that many comments here are useless/SPAM. I will clean it if I have time... --Bky1701 10:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a small page because no one can agree on the content. If you want to make major revisions, discuss them here first. This is a very sensitive subject for a lot of people. --ikiroid 15:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  So many POV tags, so little article 

message: Someone is vandalizing the body of this article. Can we have this reverted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arundhati bakshi (talk • contribs) 17:12, 3 February 2006  (UTC)
:Hello, I reverted it. Did you know that anyone can revert an article? See Wikipedia:Revert for how to do so. :) -- jeffthejiff 17:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I knew that, but I wasn't sure how to do it. Thanks for the tip. :) --Arundhati Bakshi 17:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism (1) 

message: The article itself seems to be reaching the phase of acceptability, in terms of the information and knowledge it contains on the slang meaning behind emo, but I think the best way for people to understand is to be visually stimulated; it would be great if someone could find the picture of an acrhetypal "emo" person. Now I'm not saying to flood the article with pictures of emo kids. But, rather that we need to show a picture of the traditional attire/culture of the emo kids (girl pants, tight black shirt with a random design, the straight black eye-covering hair, etc). --John Brown 03:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm...the problem with that idea is no one can agree with what a "typical" emo looks like--we have some examples of clothing, but they're the Lowest common denominator of what emos wear. Good luck, just remember copyrights and stuff--if you want to take anything off of a website, you need to be sure it's ok to do so. I'd go for something in a well-known source, not MySpace or some personal page. --ikiroid | (talk) 21:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it would be helpful. See my comments below. -- youngamerican (talk) 19:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anyone agree with me that this article needs to be visually represented? 

message: Some information should be included about the commercial impact of the emo image such as how well products designed to appeal to emo kids are selling; the "emo style" has definately entered mainstream fashion by now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.201.70 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  commercial impact 

message: Based on what I have read on the history of Zombie.
"removed poor-quality non-encyclopedic amateur art, AGAIN. Please stop putting that nonsense back" (DreamGuy)
Maybe the image here should be removed too. --FlareNUKE 22:36, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's amateur art, but I created it based on the descriptions of "emo" in the article. All of the other images were removed because they were too incomplete to fit the descriptions of emos in the article. It's very hard to find a fair-use image for the article. --The ikiroid (talk/parler/hablar/paroli/说/話) 03:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Umm… 

message: It shares similar fashion. How about some references? --782 Naumova 10:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Electroclash is much more connected to, and in fact largly rooted in, the high-fashion world of NYC and LA than it is to high-school fashion of emo. --Zmbe 02:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye, current electroclash fashion and current emo fashion seem to be HIGHLY different...I really don't see any connection at all... --JapanLover 03:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electroclash 

message: I believe the site emoholic.net should be added to the link section.  I personally would appriciate it because that site give a great definition of what emo is and also intends to offer some samples of the music/dress/actions of "emokids" from an outsiders standpoint.  Personally, I love the music by have my own style.  Personally, I don't think you would know I listen to bright eyes if you looked at me.  I am pretty much the antithisis of the commonly defined emokid (head of a fraternity, in student government, and I love sports).  I think these people need to be just as represented as the 'emos' so people dont have such a negative take on the whole topic.  Any comments --143.236.35.199 19:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never heard of it. --Pro-Lick 16:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Is this notable at all or just some site somebody put up to try and make money off the emo fad? --Pro-Lick 17:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: For the sake of WP:V, emoholic.net has no Google backlinks and Alexa's traffic ranker has it at 4,156,858 (1 being highest). The message above from [REDACTED] u just happens to correspond with the owner of the site, [REDACTED] who lives in Wisconsin ([REDACTED] is a University there). --Pro-Lick 19:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with him, I think it is a good link that has helpful info --65.73.75.58 21:56, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Methinks this anon is a meatpuppet. Only 2 contribs—adding this comment and adding the site as an external link. --The ikiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说 話し parlar) 22:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect you're right, or at least an IP sockpuppet. — Saxifrage ✎ 22:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new link should be added 

message: ChrisB deleted both of the two lines I added, the second containing a link to this talk page. His comment was "referencing a wiki talk page is not encyclopedic." While I'm not sure if I agree with this statement, after thinking about it, I agree that it was misplaced. I'm adding the link to the "See Also" section. I think it's an educational demonstration of ambiguity of the term, and that's what we're here for. If ChrisB or anybody thinks this is inappropriate, I'd request they show where it's implied so in the rules before removing it. I'm also re-adding the first line I previously added, since no justification was given for its removal. --MQDuck
:It's removable because it's original research.  It also violates WP:V and WP:RS.  A Wiki talk page violates both of those as well, granted that a Talk page is not a verifiable, reliable primary source.  Need I go on?  --ChrisB 19:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Self-Referencing 

message: You say something about dashboard confessional emphasizing a more personal style of emo, the only problem with that is DASHBOARD CONFESSIONAL AIN'T EMO. Please remove offending statements and paragraphs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.176.107.150 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Again: understand that the post above wasn't signed, and it should be voided as it is nonchalant and immaterial input. If that part of the article offends you: don't expect an apology just because you are offended when a band that you enjoy is classified as "Emo". Please wake up and smell the coffee. You would honestly be surprised as to how many times we get this on here, and how erroneous your statement, and statements like it, are. --EMC 02:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm offended they're classified emo, because well, they aren't. It's emotionally driven HARDCORE punk rock. I enjoy Dashboard Confessional, and i like emo, but Dashboard Confessional isn't emo. Antioch Arrow=Emo, Dashboard Confessional=Indie Pop Punk. Also, emo isn't a form of style, the kids who do that are called SCENE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.176.107.150 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: REMOVE OFFENDING STATEMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.176.107.150 (talk • contribs) 14:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again: no. --EMC 00:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The emo style being emphasized by bands? Give me an example of this, I have never heard any band going, "You all should dress like us and call yorselves emo." When has any band advocated a more "personal" style of emo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.176.107.150 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They don't come out and say "You should all dress like us and call yourselves 'emo'", no. "Emo" was not exactly created by the music artists, and despite what you "think", the facts are that bands do have subtle characteristic influence on its listeners. It's common sense that the fans would soon start to follow the trend of their most favored artists. Also considering you don't know anything about this topic, I'll say it again: no. --EMC 23:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dashboard Confessional? 

message: i vandalised but reverted it so plz dont block me. --65.79.36.66 15:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  vandalism (2) 

message: I have drawn and uploaded a picture of a typical emo. Any questions or comments? --ikiroid | (talk) 02:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: wicked. -- youngamerican (talk) 21:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the image is good, but i think we also need a real picture. like somthing thats on a myspace. but the drawing should stay cause a stereotype for emo is tht they are all artistic, so it fits well with that- emopunk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emopunk (talk • contribs) 20:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartoon Image 

message: definate bias, and opinion/POV showing here i can draw a great phycological pict about this/these authors. get it out. despite my opinions about "emo", (what it is, is it cool, is it not)
Reasons for complete deletion
#this article has problems that can't be solved or agreed upon
#dosen't belong in a COLOABORATION of FREE, SHARED, human knowledge if it is to be respected.
#requires constant updating from a non-biased source.
Imagine a journalist, who is not involved in music or fashion, delving into the shady nether-world of emo day and night to get the real scoop on the situation.
Its my opinion that it should go and its my opinion that should be yours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.44.130 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with you. --24.124.112.89 04:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're quite welcome to put the article up for a deletion discussion (see WP:AFD) but frankly, I think it's too much of a well known word to be removed. The article needs to be improved, not deleted.└ UkPaolo/talk┐ 08:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say don't delete it. As soon as some author or journalist creates a credible source, we can fix it. Until then, we'll just keep it very short and conservative so not to piss anyone off. If you delete this, the article will be rebuilt within hours, because emos are a giant part of the current pop culture. The users and visitors of wikipedia won't stand to purposely leave giant gaps of information in the encyclopedia. --ikiroid | (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: NO! article is dead on! keep it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.113.28.124 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: true this page needs a lot of work, but it needs to stay. emo is used so alot these days that there deserves to be somthing about it, even if a lot of the information is inacurate and contraversal- emopunk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emopunk (talk • contribs) 21:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Emo is a large segment of popular culture and we can't afford to lose the entry. --MafiaCapo 22:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote for removal 

message: I've come across a bunch of small vandalism edits people have done, and tried fixing them. They always seem to com eback and are along the lines of "so-and-so is a (sic) emo fag". Can we temporarily block the page from edits to stop these immature edits? --FyreNWater 06:45, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that proposal. --EMC 23:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock/Protect page from edits? 

message: At the very least there should be a link to National Emo Kid Beatdown Day from this article. --God <FONT FACE="Book Antiqua">Ω</font>  War 19:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No not really. We only put links to articles that provide a better understanding of the definition of emo or articles that contrast or are clearly evident that they are relevant to "emo". You wouldn't link an anti-Semetic Holiday to the Jew article, would you? Use your brain, please. --emc!  ╬  21:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Emo Kid Beatdown Day 

message: This article is very very very bias, and I'm putting a non-pov tag on it. Someone with lots of experience (and time) needs to clean this up. --Angrygoatface 23:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Simply adding an NPOV tag because you disagree with content is not acceptable.  Adding the tag requires a discussion of what content is POV or how the article should be improved.  We can't read your mind, and can't defend what's in the article if you can't specifically explain what's wrong with it. --ChrisB 00:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As wonky as this article is, I agree with ChrisB. Additionally, Music Genre articles (especially those related to the Indie, Emo, Punk, and Gothic Subcultures) are usually slightly POV because there are very vague lines when it comes to music. To Spin, emo is a good thing. Pitchfork Media, to the best of my knowledge, considers the entire genre Trite and Maudlin (or whatever new word they pulled out of their thesaurus this week). Rolling Stone can't classify any genre/movement without at least 3 of the following tags added on; post, punk, core, synth, revival, indie. Depending on who you like (I hate all three of the above AMG all the way) you will be more or less likely to classify to different styles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragoonmac (talk • contribs) 00:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the NPOV tag. This article has been written from a pro-emo perspective. This article must be rewritten to display both sides of the argument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.230.150.72 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV tag 

message: My chemical Romance is so not emo. who ever said that has no idea. MCR is more goth, ask an emo they wouldnt say they like MCR. --65.188.222.91 23:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm emo and I like MCR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.176.107.150 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's all personal opinion. Whether or not you consider them "emo", they have been considered, by many, to represent the emo (music), not the emo (slang). In fact, MTV and other pop culture media such as LaunchCast popularize them and categorize them under the genre "emo". Another good example of an emo (music) disputable band would be Avenged Sevenfold. And please, don't get all upset just because people call a favored band of yours "emo". We state facts, not opinions or emotions. Please be sure to look at NPOV. --EMC 04:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: according to their purevolume website , they are punk and rock. according to their myspace , they are rock, metal, and post hardcore. i think if they don't say their emo, then their not.- emopunk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emopunk (talk • contribs) 21:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Goth? Fuck no —Preceding unsigned comment added by In Flames (talk • contribs) 20:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gerrard personaly said that they aren't an emo band. check their wikipedia page for source —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.97.156 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gerard wouldn't know music if it hit him upside the head, despite the fact that he is loosely called a "vocalist". --emc!  ╬  20:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: MCR is DEFINATLY not emo, or goth. They were at first alternitive punk, now, unfortunalty, they are more Pop-Punk/glam rock/pop-punk. Same with FOB, P!ATD, AFI, & HIM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.210.127.106 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. I don't think so. --emc!  ╬  (t a l k) 19:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MCR? 

message: Yeah I "vandalized" this article, but being that this is a FREE encyclopedia, for anyone to edit, I have a right to change things. No I have a duty to change things IF the content is wrong (not factual) and/or biased. If you have to place a disclaimer at the beginning of an entry, the entry should be removed or edited to remove the questionable content until a non-biased definition is compiled. Until then less is more. This entry was VERY biased and it is a shame that I had to "vandalize" to make it more honest. Look at a real encyclopedia for examples of how to define a term in a NON- BIASED fashion please. Other entries in Wikipedia are quite well done, this one, however, was complete rubbish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.201.238.248 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This brings up a discussion on how this article could be written. "Emo" is such a loosely defined term, like existentialism, and it suffers from the same problem in that there is a disagreement about what it actually refers to. However, unlike existentialism, scholars have not written works on how they perceive "Emo". So we're stuck with a dilemma: either we have a short article describing a broad concept, or we have a collection of different viewpoints which will require heavy editing to NPOVerize. How do others think this article should be written? --Someone42 07:34, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe I can help? Emo = kids listening to crappy, depressing music while they cut themselves and write about it on their myspace sites; haven't ever heard of The Cure, think they invented Goth, but haven't heard the term; often addicted to Ritalin. --Kar98 22:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... you seemed to sum up the worst possible incorrect and mainstream definition for emo possible. This is exactly the problem with the whole artical. Too many people actually believe that's what emo is. --Underwater 03:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you have no idea what you're talking about. --Timeasimperialism 01:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As quoted from the article, "don't cry emo kid" --Psycho78m 05:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kar98 described an emo very well. If you want a definition of emo simply go look at My Chemical Romance. The members of that band are emo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.203.54.100 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rubbish, Trash, Wrong, and Insulting...Is objectivity DEAD!?!? 

message: This article needs to mention the similarities between goths and emos. It would provide a better understanding of emos quicker. --DarkSideOfTheSpoon 03:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ehhh...no. check this out and this out too. --emc!  ╬  (t a l k) 19:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Emo has nothing to do with goth other than that they are both musically derived from punk (goth from early punk, emo from hardcore). The fact that the term "emo" has come to partially replace the term "goth" as used by major media (i.e., satanic depressed kids who listen to Marilyn Manson and nothing to do with goth) should be mentioned though. --Switch 01:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goths again... 

message: ChrisB, is there some kind of compromise reachable regarding the self harm issue? Perhaps the statement could be rephrased; perhaps change to "no subtantial evidence" or similar? --Satchfan 03:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno.  Maybe something like: "However, apart from the anecdotal, there is no significant evidence of any correlation between emo and self-harm."? --ChrisB 07:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That works for me. --Satchfan 08:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ChrisB  

message: The article covers too little of the social scene associated with emo. 
Some emo article should fully describe the typical traits of emo fans or people from the "emo" culture. It should also include how the stereotypes are related to the real "emo" scene.
I have noticed the conspicous emergence of this group in this year, distinguished primarily by clothing and behaviour. Many of my friends have derided what they consider the typical emo characteristics, and thereby brought these to my attention before I had witnessed them independently. Many people I have seen strongly fit these characteristics, thus verifying many of those impressions.
This article and other emo articles, however, inadequately cover these characteristics.
The song-parody "I must be Emo" by Hollywood Undead lists many of the characteristics outsiders associate with emos. --Rintrah 12:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, great! So go ahead and edit the artical and add in all the extra information you know! Don't worry about making mistakes... we'll clean up any rough parts afterwards. --Underwater 23:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But before you do that, you may want to read this. --ChrisB 23:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha, this whole article is original research! But since it can be verified by empirical evidence, it's all a moot point. I doubt Jimbo would office this article over its lack of sources, because none really exist. Any articles about emos in print or on the internet are almost always sourceless biased BS. --The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 01:21, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but we can certainly do better than "I've seen people doing this, so let's add it to the article."  In his wording: "any of my friends have derided what they consider".  That doesn't work for Wikipedia. --ChrisB 05:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I gotta go with ChrisB on this one. I don't mean to denounce anybody else's efforts or status on Wikipedia, but Chris has been one of the more valued individuals who have worked on this article for quite some time now, and even putting that aside, he's absolutely correct. --emc!  ╬  (t a l k) 00:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social scene 

message: "Though the original emo scenes were not exclusionary, the modern "emo" scene has developed into a "gay friendly" scene. Though it's unclear whether it's related to the diminished "macho" elements of emo music or the "gay friendly" nature of the scene, it has become commonplace for detractors to use "emo" in combination with popular discriminatory gay slurs, such as "emo fag"."
This paragraph is completely POV. Either someone reword it, or it should be deleted from this article. --dposse 21:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  paragraph doesn't belong here. 

message: Neither of your links have reliability, and this whole article should fall under original research —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.111.164.187 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTF? 

message: A GFDL or public domain photo of someone all emo'd-out would be a great addition to this page, if anyone has a digi camera and an emo friend that is willing to pose.  youngamerican (talk) 20:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cant you just find a picture on myspace? Maybe I Should do that. *does it* --65.188.222.91 23:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, we don't know the copyright status of any of those photos. The best way to have an appropriate photo would basically have to have a wikipedian personally snap a picture of a willing friend that is dressed in an emo style. there are other ways, but this would be the best possible course to ensure compliance with the GFDL.  youngamerican (talk) 16:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see the discussion at the top of this talk page: Does anyone agree with me that this article needs to be visually represented? --ikiroid | (talk) 19:29, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The current image is really bad. We have dyed black, swept-down hair - that's it. It doesn't show the clothes, and the model doesn't even have the stereotypical labret. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SwitChar (talk • contribs) 11:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi guys, I'm new to this whole wikipedia thing. But I know that I have studied the whole Emo fashion, music and Attitude for about a year now and I know that I have all the nessessary clothing to pose for a stereotypical emo. I have the band t-shirt, the studded belt, the emo nerdy glasses, the high top converse, the tight black jeans and I have even dyed my hair jet black. I'll get I pic of myself and post it ASAP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edmuncher (talk • contribs) 01:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free use one of my pictures lol.  --Lordofchaosiori 17:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  pic??? 

message: Isn't Emo also a way of meaning a guy who slits his wrists? If so, why isn't it in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.130.12.163 (talk • contribs) 06:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a common misconception. Altho there maybe emos that do self-harm, it is something consistent across all types of people—especially teens. Emos merely used as a Scapegoat to criticize the popularity of such a thing. --The ikiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说 話し parlar) 19:25, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes and no. The wrist slitting is a stereotype applied to emos (before "Emo" became a widely known, the same stereotype was usually applied to goths) and thus self-mutilation is often considered to be "emo" even if the person doing it otherwise isn't. --Ashmodai 20:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's often a blatant stereotype. Often people that appear emo (or are emo) are accused of slitting their wrists. I go to high school, so I know all about this. I think it's just a stupid stereotype. Take this quote from my friend's girlfriend, for example: "I hate emos. It's okay if you slit your wrists, just don't tell everybody about it." That kind of stereotype pisses me off, but I'm sure it's still true in some cases (stereotypes usually don't exist if they aren't true to at least some extent). --bob rulz 08:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could it be added to the article that 'Emo's are stereotyped as slitting their wrists, but this is not the case with the majority of emos, infact people that are not emo's slit their wrists and called emo' or something along those lines? It might help people understand that the stereoype doesn't apply to all emo's, and that people who slit their wrists aren't necesarily emo's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.130.15.187 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heck, no, those kind of sterotyoes are VERY wrong. Wrist cutters are called masochists(sp?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.210.127.106 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who cares if it's wrong? Look, we don't censor here on Wikipedia. I believe it should be added. After all, this is an article on the slang definition, and that is one of the stereotypes commonly associated with emo. --emc!  ╬  (t a l k) 19:25, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, I think the S&M folks would take offense at that, as most of them are not at all suicidal. Wrist cutters are called wrist cutters, just leave it at that. Beyond this, I agree with emc. --treed 21:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Who cares if it's wrong?"?!! Would you like it if someone said that everytime someone wrote a wikipedia article? Psshh. I swear... people nowadays... --Lordofchaosiori 17:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wrist slitters 

message: Though the original emo scenes were not exclusionary, the modern "emo" scene has developed into a "gay friendly" scene. Though it's unclear whether it's related to the diminished "macho" elements of emo music or the "gay friendly" nature of the scene, it has become commonplace for detractors to use "emo" in combination with popular discriminatory gay slurs, such as "emo fag".
What are they saying? The scene is "gay friendly", so some "emo" people are gay and that's why people call them "emo fags"? Sounds kinda dumb to me. I think this should be re-written or deleted. Your thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Underwater (talk • contribs) 01:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No that's not it at all. Do you even understand what that section of the article says? --EMC 00:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. The article is saying that the Emo culture is OK with other people being gay, including themselves, which is an oversimplification, like saying all mexicans like beans, but that's what the article is saying. Someone could clean that up. (I'm mexican and I don't like beans by the way haha.) --Lordofchaosiori 17:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay Friendly??? 

message: I'm personally sick of people, especially non-registered users, crying about how their favored bands (ex. "MCR", "Fallout Boy", "Dashboard Confessional") are not emo, and then back up their statements with absolutely nothing and/or nothing but personal opinion. It is a waste of space on Wikipedia and a waste of energy for other users who feel obligated to respond to such comments/proposals.
To those who this statement directly relates to: if the idea of one of your favored bands being considered "emo" personally offends you, that's your own quandary. Now, I don't have a problem with objections such as these, but I do have a problem with these objections when they are based on personal opinion, and at often times, nothing at all. If you have intelligible, supported, and logical suggestions or proposals, feel free to share them. If not, kindly leave your thoughts to yourself so those who wish to edit this article successfully can do so without hiatus. This goes for all people who wish to share their input on this edit page, for I've realized that this edit page is full of crap that is very unconstructive and only mars this edit page. It's this kind of behavior that makes pages like this under the category of "Wikipedia controversial topics". --EMC 23:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: TRUE!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.126.72 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I'm emo and I know emo music, (I'm not saying I'm a source), and almost all other emo people agree with me that Dashboard Confessional is not Emo. But you're right, people should back up their statements with something. --Lordofchaosiori 17:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention 

message: The whole thing. I removed some unnecessary, unfunny junk from paragraph 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.56.49 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  stupid bullshit 

message: I merged in a line from Patch (emo) (now redirected here). Can someone verify that the line is actually correct  , as I don't know much at all about the fashion/culture to know myself! --Chuq 22:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if that term is used, it's not commonly used (and the statement is unsourced). An "emo patch" is generally something you attach to your backpack or messenger bag. --ChrisB 04:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that Chris, looks like its a neologism by the creator of Patch (emo). I'll mark it (the patch redirect) for deletion. --Chuq 07:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge from "Patch (emo)" 

message: can we possibly get a better picture of what an emo looks like, just having a caricature makes it seem as though it can only be bad to be an emo, or be associated with emo culture. --Fabio 19:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Emo kids don't get their pictures taken. The bright light causes them great pain and photographs prove the emo person to actually exist, something to fight to make sure people don't know. --H2P 07:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: agree with Fabio about needing a photograph. From where I come from the image given bares little resemblance to what an emo looks like, and there are pictures of people of an emo fashion (lets not get nasty about this H2P) --Woodgreener 22:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I might suggest using this artwork  (or something like it) as pictures. It seems to give a pretty clear idea of some of the fashion accessories associated with the "emo" look. I leave it to someone else, as images are not really my forte. --IllaZilla2 08:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image