Talk:Hardcore/Archive 1

message: I just wanted to say that bands like Madball, Sick of it All or 25 ta Life could be added to the Hardcore-Metal bands list but... Sepultura is not Hardcore! It's not even close to the type of sound here described (which i think is a good hardcore-sound description). Sepultura is a Death Metal band! Perhaps with some diferent beliefs, but they're not an Hardcore band! They are Agnostic Front and Sick of it All friends, but I repeat... they're not an Hardcore band!
And Metallica are neither!
*OK, OK!  All right, already!  I just put Metallica in there becuase of their affinity with hardcore (Discharge/ Misfits Earth A.D.), but you're right, they belong elsewhere.  I don't know who put Sepultura in there, though.
:I think the concept of 'hardcore heavy metal' is really dubious: metalcore is a crossover between hardcore punk and metal, which means that the "harcore" in "metalcore" is the hardcore already referred to in "hardcore punk".--XmarkX 06:00, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: And I took out the sentences about "a lot of bands" being "cynical" b/c of NPOV concerns.  And I removed the sentence linking hardcore to The Stooges and the MC5.  That's kind of a tenuous connection, only in that the bands that inspired hardcore were more directly influenced by those [great] acid/hard rock bands.  Anyone interested will most likely go to the punk page and see the Early Punk Bands or Pre-Punk bands links.  cheers! :)
----
I think this should be a disambiguation page, and may get around to making it one sometime soon.  There are three distinct genres of music called "hardcore", and the punk rock kind doesn't have ownership over the word. Tuf-Kat
----
I just thought the word needed a general definition, so I tried my hand at giving it some sort of meaning.  If I'm off base, have at it. Nithos 20:21, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

message: I think there should be a proper article for "hardcore" concerning its etymology and such. I for one have no idea where the term has originated, but apparently it's used in a whole lot of contexts from politics to music to adult entertainment. - Quirk 14:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate article about the term "hardcore" 

message: I find it kind of awkward that the recent expansion of this disambig cut out a short, well-written list of hardcore-type music genres, liking to categories that provide no such context/explaination, nor do they pick out the actual terms in question (it's just a link to a category - much harder to browse or understand as far as the term hardcore itself goes). And yet now we have a long list of over 25 songs and albums containing the word hardcore. It seems like we've cut the wrong stuff out of the article, and we've bloated a section of the thing that might not even need to be there. I present, as model, French, which is concise, easy to read, and most importantly, has links to List of all pages beginning with "French" and 
List of French phrases used by English speakers. Seems like it would make a whole lot more sense to do something like that (ie List of songs, films, and albums containing the word "hardcore" or something). --Cheeser1 05:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that I do appreciate and commend the work that went into searching for articles whose titles contained the word "hardcore" and so forth, I just feel like a different way to organize that effort might make for a better presentation. --Cheeser1 05:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand what you're saying and I debated with myself before making that change. But my final thought was: Shouldn't the main articles--which are linked too; the category links are just further resources--be the place for further disambiguation of the main genre? That is, shouldn't all the subgenres of hardcore punk, for example, be listed in and explained in that article? Why does that information need to be duplicated here? I'm open to putting that info back on this page if there's a good reason for it. But I look at the hardcore-punk navigation bar in the article, and it has more complete coverage (if less explanation of the differences) than what used to be here (although post-hardcore is not included for some reason). And the hardcore techno article also has a list that is more complete than what was here. (I hope you noticed that I wasn't picking on the musical genres. I did sort of the same thing with the hardcore wrestling: giving a link to a list rather than listing each of the many hardcore wrestling titles.) --ShelfSkewed Talk 20:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

text: To address your other point: This really isn't a very long disambig page. The kind of organization used for the French page is necessary because the term is so general and widely used; there must be upwards of 1,000 pages that begin with French, and that page doesn't even deal with article titles that have French as the second or third word, which the Hardcore page does. --ShelfSkewed Talk 20:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do see your point - I'm just not sure. I mean, someone who searches "Hardcore" might be looking for the article on Metalcore. I doubt that person is looking for Larry Hardcore, a character in "Raisin the Stakes: A Rock Opera in Three Acts, a 2003 episode of Clone High" nor The Hardcore Chair Swingin' Freaks, an ECW tag team, 1997 - 1999. Maybe I'm misjudging it, and maybe I'm not getting disambig guidelines, but it seems to me that when someone searches "Hardcore" and gets this page, we should link to exactly the things that they might be looking for. I don't mind it the way it is unless someone steps in and says otherwise, it just seemed a bit much to add when cutting what I figured was helpful. Maybe a third party has another opinion? --Cheeser1 02:24, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're disrespecting The Hardcore Chair Swingin' Freaks now, we're going to go round and round, bubba. I keed, I keed—I'd never heard of them until I dug them up and put them on the page. And point taken: People should be able to find what they're likely to have come looking for with the minimum amount of trouble. I've restored the subgenres. --ShelfSkewed Talk 04:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi, I didn't notice this on the talk page before I deleted half the article.  I really think the stuff I deleted shouldn't have been there, unless I'm misunderstanding how disambiguation pages are supposed to work.  Nobody is going to type in "hardcore" and expect to get an article on "post-hardcore." --P4k 00:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As much as I hate to say it--because it was my excessive zeal that was responsible for most of the stuff that got cut--your edit was the right thing to do. I was trying to follow articles that I thought were good examples, only to find recently that I was using bad examples. I think, though, that some of the hardcore punk subgenres could go back in--I haven't changed my opinion on that (again). Maybe I'll go back to knitting. Wait, I don't know how to knit... --ShelfSkewed Talk 03:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I would say most or all of the ones that were there. The guideline you cite is the one I certainly violated with my expansion of the page to list everything under the sun that includes the word hardcore. But as Cheeser1 pointed out above, a user who types in "hardcore" is probably not looking for The Hardcore Chair Swingin' Freaks but might well be looking for metalcore or hardcore dancing. Any of the subgenres might, in some contexts, be referred to as simply hardcore--which isn't true of Old Grandma Hardcore or Digital Hardcore Recordings or most of the other items I had added. --ShelfSkewed Talk 19:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well they're subgenres/hybrid genres, so someone could easily refer to a post-hardcore or melodic hardcore band as playing "hardcore," but I don't think anyone would say something about "hardcore" and expect others to know that they were talking about  only melodic hardcore rather than hardcore as a whole.  And, like I said, I don't think anyone will ever type in "hardcore" looking for Melodic Hardcore; anybody who's interested in that topic would know it's a subgenre and expect to arrive at hardcore punk if they type in "hardcore."  I guess metalcore might be different by virtue of its hugeness/distinctness though.  Anyway what do I know.  You could be right about metalcore and hardcore dancing; I think the other two definitely aren't necessary.  If you want to re-add any of them I won't revert you.  BTW I left Breakbeat Hardcore and its ilk because I know people do refer to those simply as hardcore/'ardkore.  I can't believe I've written so much about this. --P4k 00:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent expansion (a bit much?) 

message: Building
* A kind of foundation formed from broken brick or stone. 
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Clconway (talk • contribs).
(moved here from dab page by --ShelfSkewed Talk 01:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not just making this up, although its hard to turn up a reliable source on it. I came across this during a disambiguation sweep. See Concrete slab and Damp-proof course. Or Google it: "Broken bricks or stone which, consolidated, are used as a foundations in extreme cases." from freepages.history.rootsweb.com/~wakefield/jargonbuild.html (which is broken). The following come up if you Google "brick hardcore":  and  Clconway 20:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but is there any reason to put this term on this disambig page? No. It's not here for the same reason we removed the link to Hard-core predicate. No one will look up "hardcore" and expect to see "hard-core predicate" because nobody would say "hardcore" and mean "hard-core predicate." As opposed to the forms of "hardcore" on this disambig, which may be referred to only as "hardcore." It seems to me that "hardcore foundation" is the same way. It's an important piece of terminology in a specific field, but it itself is not referred to by "hardcore" unless followed by "foundation." No reason to be here. --Cheeser1 22:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the two examples provided, it looks like this meaning of hardcore is used in isolation--i.e. referred to in context as hardcore alone. My objection to the entry is that it's just a dictionary definition. There's no article to disambiguate and no article to link to that provides further explanation or context (the two examples only mention the term; they don't explain it). Until a "hardcore foundation" article is created, or an explanation of hardcore in this sense is added to another article, there's no reason for it to be on the dab page. --ShelfSkewed Talk 22:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. Perhaps the articles above should link to wikt:hardcore? Clconway 23:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: No, I'm afraid you're incorrect, at least not as far as the mathematical term goes. It is not used in isolation, except perhaps as a modifier connected to a predicate (e.g. "For the function f, fP is hard-core." - used in isolation yes, but as an adjective directly modifying something explicitly known to be a predicate). It seems, based on references (as few as there are) for the other term that it functions the same way. --Cheeser1 01:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought we were talking, not about the mathematical term, but about the foundation usage under discussion. And when I mentioned "two examples," I was referring to the articles cited by Clconway for the use of hardcore in that sense. As for linking to Wiktionary, the Hardcore page includes a link to the Wiktionary entry, which does give the "broken brick or stone" usage as one of the definitions. And that's sufficient coverage, I think, until an article or section is created to support the term on the dab page. I misunderstood the suggestion. Yes, Wiktionary-linking the term hardcore in those articles is a good idea.--ShelfSkewed Talk 04:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Building foundation?