Talk:List of rock genres

message: I would suggest using the List of popular music genres page as a guide for restructuring this page, as well as any other genre pages that are not yet structured like it. - K1darkknight 02:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur, we could base it off the system used on the russian wikipedia. Zazaban (talk) 23:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: Just a note to say that entries should, pretty obviously, be rock music and genres, not other forms of music, terms or national subdivisions of wider genres. Links should also not go to a band or be a redirect to an article that does not mention the genre, in these cases there is no evidence of notability.--SabreBD (talk) 23:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Criteria

message: --Rockerdude101 (talk) 22:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I already set out my position above. Some of the genres you have added are good work, they are clearly rock genres, but others are clearly not. The point of an article like this is not to add as many links as possible, but to provide a list of notable links that fit the title of the article. The use of bands is particularly problematic as these links risk becoming circular.--SabreBD (talk) 08:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the links that liked to band because they where gen're that did not have there own sperate page ,I think I ,or someone else (I can't remember) has now taken them down ,I would maybe surggest that ,some of thegenre's that link to the same page (most of the subgenres to grindcore) ,that they have some kind of infomation of the page ,they are on the page (in the box that say's subgenres at the top in grindcore for example) ,however there is no infomation on the genre at all ,not on the page ,or on a different page ,I have aid this o nthe talk page on grindcore as well I think --Rockerdude101 (talk) 12:54, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we are in agreement, although to be honest I find this extremely difficult to read. So, to summarise, only genres that link to pages, and only redirects where the target pages have some information on a subgenre. Linking to individual bands is really not acceptable.--SabreBD (talk) 15:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Progessive bluegrass ,Alternative country and wonky pop  

message: Hello, can pungle be added to the list of rock genre? It's a mix punk and jungle, it's on the page Digital hardcore too --Rockerdude101 (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You have repeatedly added it after I removed it. Thank you for finally bringing it up here instead of continuing to edit war. I removed it because the Pungle article likely will be deleted, if not by PROD then by AfD. If it is not deleted after these processes, then feel free to add it back. For readers interested in this non-genre, see the discussion at Talk:Pungle. Cresix (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2012
It's not deleted yet though --Rockerdude101 (talk) 16:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

text: This is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. We don't have to rush to put something in an article. It can wait for the outcome of the deletion process, or consensus here. Otherwise, please don't edit war and continue to add it. Read WP:BRD. Cresix (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please respect the WP:BRD process. Once article content has been challenged (as is the case here), that's standard operating procedure on Wikipedia. I don't intend to pander to your continued pushing against that procedure by repeating the same thing over and over here. So discuss to your heart's content here, but leave the item out of the article until the process finishes. Thank you. Cresix (talk) 17:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pungle 

message: Does Deathcountry and Red Dirt count as a sub-genres of rock?  --Rockerdude101 (talk) 15:48, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deathcountry&Red Dirt 

message: I would like these genres to be added to the list, Deathcountry,Speedcore and RedDirt I'm not 100% sure on if they are but, Gothenburg metalis a rather big scene in Swedish metal, Swedecore is a genre of rock music, very much related to Gothenburg metal, Ambient pop is a Derivative form od Dream pop, as is Shoegazing, it is also on a list of hardcore punk sub-genres, so by definiion if it's a subgenre of hardcore punk it will be one of rock as well, since hardcore punk itself is a sub-genre of rock, and Gothic americana is a sub-genre of rock music --Rockerdude101 (talk) 17:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Gothenburg Metal and Swedecore are linked to redirects that go to a paragraph in an article that has one weak source. I don't consider that enough at this point. Create articles on those genres with appropriate sourcing, then add them to the list. Gothic Americana has been proposed for deletion because it has been completely unsourced for five years. Wait for the deletion process to finish; if the article survives PROD and AfD, then add it here. I'm not sure about the other genres you mention; I'll have to look into them before offering an opinion. Cresix (talk) 19:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

text: Remember, we need enough sourcing for an entire article for each genre. Cresix (talk) 00:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deathcountry, Red Dirst, Gothenburg metal, Swedecore, Ambient pop, Gothic Americana, Speedcore  

message: New Romanticism, Psychedelic folk, Psychedelic soul and Psychedelic pop are all sub-genres of rock music, New Romanticism is a sub-genre of new wave, Psychedelic folk, Psychedelic soul and Psychedelic pop are all subgenres of Psychedelic rock, Psychedelic folk being a fusion of Psychedelic rock and folk(or folk rock), Psychedelic soul is a fusion of Psychedelic rock and soul, being very influenced by Jimi Hendrix. And finaly Psychedelic pop is a mix of Psychedelic rock and pop music, so all of the genres that have been removed resently are all sub-genres of rock.
--Rockerdude101 (talk) 17:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: A fusion genre and a sub-genre are not the same thing. Even if a genre borrows from another that is rock that does not make it rock. Pop constantly borrows from rock, but by definition, what is pop is not rock. Please note that psychedelic folk pre-dates psychedelic rock, but we wouldn't say that psychedelic rock is a sub-genre of folk. New Romanticism was a fashion and youth movement, synthpop was the genre, just as Mod was a movement and R&B was the major genre associated with it.--SabreBD (talk) 18:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with SabreBd. Every "movement" that happens to involve a particular style of music is not a "genre". Cresix (talk) 18:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

text: anyone can sit here and make up theories about music evolution all day long.  Ridernyc (talk) 00:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Romanticism, Psychedelic folk, Psychedelic soul, Psychedelic pop  

message: Is it just me or does this page looks like some 15-18 year old overly-enthusiastic person wanted to impress its readers? It's true that throughout the years, the term "genre" has been basically raped into its current ambiguous, useless definition. However, I believe it's common sense to know that cultural movements are not genres. Listen to Venom. Then listen to Iron Maiden. Then listen to Def Leppard. All three of them are part of the NWOBHM. They don't sound the same. This page is extremely stupid and full of flaws. I'll edit it when I have some free time.
In what universe could something entitled "C86" be considered a genre?
Pagan Metal is, for example a term that people use to describe any Folk Metal song with Black Metal vocals, even if its lyrics have nothing to do with paganism.
Impressive page, but wrong. ScindoLuna (talk) 16:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This article needs a serious revision, as it mentions some genres whose existence is not even proven. I was also thinking  of editing it, to make it look better and make it meet Wikipedia's standards. Anyway, thank you for your potential efforts. --Bright Darkness (talk) 21:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of us have chipped away at removing some of the useless cruft and non-genre entries. My basic strategy is to remove a genre that does not link to a reasonably well sourced article that identifies it as a genre. If you think there should be other criteria for removal, feel free to express them here. I also encourage you to cull through the entries for candidates for removal. Be prepared for a battle, however, from the 15-18 year olds who don't want their favorites removed. Cresix (talk) 23:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As Cresix observes, some of us spend a lot of time trying to maintain some sort of validity on this page. I don't think we have every discussed it but my strategy is much the same: if an entry does not have some reasonably sourced evidence of being a genre at the target then it tends to get removed. Generally I also remove entries that are clearly not rock music. I am very happy to have more eyes on the page, but be careful not to just delete entries you do not like being here. We could of course discuss some criteria that might help the process.--SabreBD (talk) 20:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

text: I would also suggest that they be organized in categories and subcategories much like other genres lists do. ThisguyYEAH (talk) 19:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't recommend it, given all the problems it causes at List of electronic music genres, with disagreements about which category sub-genres belong to and the issue of where hybrid genres go. That page is far more high maintenance than this one.--SabreBD (talk) 08:03, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page is wrong in so many ways