Talk:Hardcore punk/Archive 1

message: I have added some reference links to the article.--Libertyguy 14:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: "Unfortunately, the hardcore scene became associated with violence."
Isn't this POV? Or does wikipedia promote humanism? ;)
"Veterans remembered that only a couple of years earlier, they were being attacked on the streets by hostile metalheads." Can someone expand on this in the article? The Anthrax guys said that at the time, metalheads couldn't even go to punk shows because they would get beaten up. Maybe this is wrong, but it would be good if someone could explain more about the friction between hardcore punks and the thrash metal people. Maybe something about the origins of the conflict between the communities?
Anthrax was a thrash metal band always looking for a gimmick. Among the living album they decided they would use NYHC images such as shaved head images, mosh,  and the NYHC logo to exploit for thier own record selling greed.
Well it was not too appreiciated. The story was the lead singer showed up at a NYHC show and was beat up. Mullets were just plain goofy as well as the metalheads were the first scene to exploit and commercialize certain elements of the hardcore punk scene. For example "moshing".
nonetheless Anthraxs next gimmick was thrash metal rap..
basically the animosity was because in the first half of the 80's metalheads were one of the close minded people hardcore punks had to fight. In the late 80's ironically because of hardcore punk bands going crossover (ie. suicidal, DRI, COC)metalheads started to copy and take credit for many things started in the hardcore punk scene.
In response to the below, when "hardcore kids" dance ("hardcore dancing" is probably explained somewhere on wiki), metal kids tend to want to start push moshing or something of that sort, so confusion starts and the metal kids think that the hardcore kids are being agressive towards them, therefore fights happen often (atleast this has been the case in my experience in FL)
:That still happens today.  I was at a show in Ft. Lauderdale where it was a mix of hardcore bands and death metal bands.  Generally when on band was on the kids for that band were the ones in the pit while the opposite genre just stood back and watched.  There was still the occasional friction though.  Funny thing is, while the kids for one band would act like they hated the music from the other bands, they failed to hear that the metal bands had distinct hardcore breakdowns or that the hardcore bands had distinct metal parts.  So, these days I have to imagine that the close-mindedness is a little more equal if it wasn't back then.--Skeev 12:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hardcore / Metal Violence 

message: I have started a music genre stub for Australian hardcore (with further work required) but can't work out how to add it, or would s/o pls do it for me. Thanks. Paul foord 00:12, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: how do you add to the regional scenes in the table?

message: So i added Umeå hardcore in the "regional scenes" part of the box. Umeå hardcore is basically about, well umeå hardcore. I've been wanting to write about for a long time so other ppl of other nationalities can learn about it. 
i was also wondering why you call it hardcore punk, we call it just hardcore. hardcore punk is a mix of hardcorea nd punk, like som bands are. well thats it. maybe i will add some more about the current hardcore scene which is now growing again. ( totalt jävla märker and so on)
thx!
Added Sweden and USA at time Australia added for consistency --Paul foord 12:02, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  added Umeå hardcore 

message: I'm adding this at the top. I've tried to address most of the earlier comments in rewriting the page (on bias, sources, different regional scenes, etc -- the page is about 85% new material). However, it needs some fleshing out inre: late '80s and '90s hXc: Revelation Records; the placement of pop-oriented bands like All, Bad Religion, etc.; connections with the early grunge scene, and whatever else is relevant.
Also, the table is sort of not doing it, in my opinion -- the article seems to need a good photo.
Auto movil 17:43, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Note (re: Talk Page Comments Below) 

message: I made a bunch of edits, some of which may require justification:
Removed reference to Social Distortion.  They weren't even a second-string band, and outside LA they didn't have many fans.  Replaced them with Neg Approach and the Necros from Detroit (yes, I know, Maumee, OH, but their scene was Detroit), two hugely influential bands.  Removed Zeroption form Toronto--while they were certainly better known than Social Distortion they were not a huge influence on the same level as the other bands mentioned.
Changed "first phase" to end in 1982 because the end of 1982 was the first crucial turning point in hardcore (the birth of MRR)--at the end of 1981 there were perhaps a dozen noteworthy hardcore bands and five or six noteworthy fanzines.  At the end of 1982 there were at least a hundred bands worth noting and dozens of worthwhile fanzines.  The bands from '80 to '82 were the vanguard, and built the infrastrcuture that was used by the hardcore explosion in '83 and beyond.  1984 (aside from Orwellian symbolism) is a pretty meaningless year in hardcore history.
----
The page is totally screwed up and in more ways than Paige mentioned.  Citing American Hardcore as a worthwhile reference is just WRONG.  The book is full of mistakes, half-truths and outright lies, and has a huge bias to boot.  Mr Blush crucifies political bands and individuals (particularly left-wing ones), while praising self-avowed racists like White Power (the band, name taken from the movement).  His sources are chosen to support his bias and he's inclined to blow off bands he doesn't like, no matter how significant they may be.  I don't really feel like going in too much depth, but if you're going to edit this page based on material from American Hardcore, please reconsider.
----
Ugh!  I'm trying to think of ways to tweak this article, but a lot of it is just wrong.  The history is totally California-centric, somehow glossing over first wave punk bands in N.Y.C. and D.C. who helped to define the sound(s).  It's unclear in the separation of this sub-genre from mainstream punk as the second wave began.  It overemphasizes the significance of British bands.  It mixes up bands in subtly wrong categories.  It makes no mention of the two periods of subsequent crossover with mainstream punk.  It gives no info on the influence of metal or oi.  Most importantly, though, it leaves out a ton of history and important bands!
Is anyone absolutely in love with this page, to the point where they can't bear to see major revisions?  Otherwise, I'd like to take a crack at really expanding it and adding a lot of detail.  Any objections?  -- Paige 13:35, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: I'm never going to get around to doing a major rewrite of this article.   Paige 01:11, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: xXx

message: Nobody I know calls Hardcore "hardcore punk". Somebody should change the title.
-----------
You dont know the roots then. In the 80's the type of punk was hardcore. It gave root to what your calling "hardcore" today. Hardcore was a punk thing in the 80's. Now its more of a metal thing.
I think your looking for the metalcore page, maybe that needs to be expanded.
-----------------------------------------------------
:Some sort of disambiguation is necessary, so the title can't be perfect.   It can't be at just hardcore or hardcore music because there are other genres of music also called hardcore, mostly a bunch of heavy/pounding techno stuff related to gabber.  Although everyone who listens to that just calls it hardcore, we have its article at hardcore techno, because we need to disambiguate.  Same thing here. --Delirium 07:39, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
What about "Hardcore (Punk)"?  To me, hardcore punk and hardcore are different things, and I dont think I'm the only one who this goes for.  Though the exact line is fuzzy, and there are lots of variations in definitions, an example might be Youth of Today or any "metalcore" like Shai Hulud band being Hardcore without being Hardcore Punk and maybe say the Germs being Hardcore Punk without being Hardcore, with the Dead Kennedys being both Hardcore and Hardcore Punk.  I really do hate that it's called Hardcore Punk, because that's just out and out wrong. Jacib 12:28, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming of the page 

message: I've never heard Minor Threat or Black Flag referred to as "street punk," and to call them such is definitely wrong.
--64.222.43.245 13:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Street Punk? 

message: Post-hardcore should have some reference in the article, I also thought of adding it to the sub-genres</S> derivative forms on the two larger templates & adding derivative forms on footer template. Comments please Paul foord 13:47, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Paul foord 22:58, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-hardcore 

message: Why is this written so poorly?  And why is Bridge 9 always listed as such an important and nearly god-like record label?  I must say that there is a lot more to hard-core and that this page makes it look like something to not be taken seriously.  It's the same problems as on hard-core or punk message boards.  You try to use it to find out when a show is or, as in wikipedia's case, some important information on the history and then all you get is people jabbering back and forth over who is hard-core and who is not. - anon.
I dont want to be an idiot, but if you dont like the article, fix it ^_^ -- and to answer your question, tons of people wrote it. It MIGHT be considered representative of the writing / research skills of people in the hardcore fandom that this article isn't that great... but dont whine about it. If you're not fixing it, you're part of the problem... *goes back to fixing disambig links* TastemyHouse 17:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Who wrote this?" 

message: The death grunt article is not clear about the relationship to hardcore vocalisation. Would editors here please have a look? Paul foord 10:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death grunt query 

message: I removed:
In those years, hardcore was the same as punk except hardcore was straight edge. For information read further into the article.
Of the bands referenced, only Minor Threat was Straight edge.--SVTCobra 03:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Straight edge]] 

message: Dead Kennedys are only "OTHER" influences ? They are one of the big...one of the greatest... --PET 05:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead Kennedys ... 

message: "such as Sadcore, and Slowcore. The term "Emocore", however, does have links to Hardcore"
has anyone ever heard the terms "sadcore" or "slowcore"? because I haven't
This certainly isn't widley used and should be taken off the page.   While "emocore" is rarley used, "Emo" is the most commonly used term for this, but it doesn't necessairly stand for "emotional hardcore" in today's hardcore, so that should be moved to the 80s-90s section.  People today concider Emo to be a seperate genre.
KurtFF8 04:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The terms are widely used although they do have nothing to do with hardcore so a hardcore fan wouldn't necessarily be familiar with them. They refer to indie bands such as Low (band), Codeine (band) & Red House Painters. --Diabolical 02:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sadcore? 

message: This page needs a complete revamp.  When people start claiming that Metallica were influenced by hardcore, its gone too far.  I'm working on it... Punk isn't, and hasn't ever been, metal.  Other comments on here are correct; punks and metalheads don't like each other.  Also, which should be obvious, hardcore has always been east-coast, while metal was west-coast.  Get a clue.  By the way, people, learn how to fucking sign your comments; jesus.Static3d 08:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crap

message: So, I'm noticing the external links with the latest addition of the "first krasnodar hardcore" page, and I'm noticing that these are pretty arbitrary sites that don't seem to relate directly to the subject material on this page. Limp Bizkit and Linkin Park aren't exactly hardcore... If you want a listing of random sites that may or may not be about Hardcore punk, then hit Google and search for that term... the sites listed there should be of use to people interested in more information; Punknews is an excellent resource, but outside of that one, I'm up for deleting most of the other links at the top of that section, and shuffling a couple of them to the proper sub categories.  Suggestions? Xinit 20:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Does anyone have a problem with me writing an article on it? 782 Naumova 10:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Posi 

message: The last line of the first section:
However, today, and for the purpose of this article, it refers more or less exclusively to what was known as 'thrash.'
This line should be rewritten in my opinion. Is the author saying that what is called "hardcore" today is basically what used to be called "thrash"? It kind of seems to read as if "for the purposes of this article" we are calling hardcore "thrash" which I think would lead someone completely new to these musical genres to think hardcore and thrash are exactly the same thing, but they are not.
At least when I was getting into this scene in the late 80's, "Thrash" was always more of a skate-punk thing and more related to metal, and seemed to originate from the west coast. (D.R.I. comes to mind) While 'hardcore" seemed to be a direct descendent of Minor Threat. Though very much part of the hardcore "scene", it does not seem correct to say they are the same thing. To my understanding, thrash would be a subgenre of hardcore, am i wrong? Or a pre-genre? Or an early relative to hardcore? But the two are not interchangeable terms.
--64.222.43.245 13:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Line is misleading 

message: The artice TOTALY leaves out the whole New York hardcore scene, Although I agree that it could be considered a totaly seperate style. No(or very little) mention to bands like warzone,DRI,agnostic front,carnivore,or murphys law(and a million others Ive never heard of ,we'd need a NYC resident to really do this subject justice) Theres not really any mentoion of boston groups other tham mentioning a comp album.Allmost sounds like dischord wrote the hardcore WIKI entry !
zaphodbblx@gmail.com
I think that Agnostic Front has changed hardcore alot (or at least contributed to it) in the sense of the transformation of the hardcore of the early 80s to what people concider to be hardcore today.KurtFF8 01:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is totaly DC/west coast centric 

message: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of straight edge groups (second nomination) Paul foord 12:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of straight edge groups is being considered for deletion 

message: someone needs to change the double kick drum pedal thing, that's never used in punk.
This isn't specifically punk, it's Hardcore, a much louder, fast-tempoed genre then classic Punk.  In my thinking "Hardcore" and "Hardcore Punk" should have two different pages.  Because in my thinking, they are very different, and people who started in the punk era should be "Hardcore Punk" because they basically created the genre.  Bands who started in the "Hardcore" era should be called "Hardcore", and bands that started outside that era (later) should be called "Post-Hardcore".  My point is, that we should have TWO DIFFERENT pages.  I've heard Hardcore, and I've heard Hardcore Punk, and they are much different.
Uhhh. Double bass is used in D-Beat.--71.236.239.19 03:50, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double Kick? 

message: These people have been adding false vanity references into this article for almost two years.
Sallese is a tale-teller who has been trying to claim that he invented the term, "hardcore." The story keeps changing, but the new version is that a writer at a college newspaper "picked up" on his use of the term. 
Even if it were true (and nobody I know who was around in NY during '80-'82 thinks it's true), Sallese adds entire paragraphs attempting to establish this claim. I've left the outline and removed unnecessary embellishment. 
Sallese was also recently quoted in a book telling a story about the band ISM and the radio station, WLIR. I've kept the basics, but must stress that the story comes from Sallese, is printed in the book, and is now being used by Sallese as a reference in this article. He's referencing himself.
re: The guy from Zeroption, the band had a single song on a compilation in 1984. They are not a seminal early hardcore band.
----------------------------------------------------------------
*Sallese posted his vanity references again, so I deleted them.Spylab 03:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  re: Bob Sallese and that guy from Zeroption 

message: * Fact:  "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" was in regular rotation on WLIR, WFMU, WNYU & WFDU. Fact: "John Hinckley Jr."  produced by Jism & Sallese was nominated two weeks in a row for "screamer of the week" on WLIR and was in heavy rotation.
*Fact:  "John Hinckley Jr." was the first hardcore song to recieve commercial airplay in the NY metropolitan area.
*Fact:  "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" was the first NYCHC comp.
*Fact:  The 1983 release of Ism's "A Diet For The Worms" (produce by Jism & Sallese and album concept by Sallese/ see sleeve) included "I Think I Love You"  which once again was nominated for "screamer of the week".  Once again, it was one of the few "hardcore songs" getting any commercial airplay in the metropolitan NY area...(even in 1983)
*Fact:  "A Diet For The Worms" topped CMJ college radio charts.
*Fact: Jism & Sallese promoted The Mob in Queens.  Eisner did PR work for S.I.N. Records. (see The Big Apple Rotten To The Core sleeve). Eisner later used Sallese's "hardcore" jargon in a review of The Mob.  Spylab continues to butcher the blog making the story very confusing.
*Fact:  The term "hardcore" was used in the movie "Decline of Western Civilization" before DOA or Sallese or Eisner used the term.  The point of the article was that the term seemed to catch on sometime in '81.  No one person or group "invented it".
*Fact: Most of the members of bands on the "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" were from Queens (birthplace of punk) or Brooklyn & Manhatten.  There was one band from Nassau County ("The Headlickers") who were a kick ass band playing A7 in those days.  As any native New Yorker knows, when you make reference to "Long Island" it is usually understood as Nassau County or Suffolk County despite the actual geography.  Nobody refers to The Ramones as a Long Island Band since Queens is in NYC.  
Ism (Queens NYC), The Mob (Queens, NYC) Butch Lust & The Hypocrites ( Brooklyn & Manhatten, NYC), Squirm (Brookyln, NYC), Killer Instinct (Queens & Manhatten, NYC), The Headlickers (Nassau County)
*Fact: George Hurchella never did an interview with Jism or Sallese in his book yet Spylab continues to rewrite the article without knowing the facts or bothering to check into them.  Hurchella did his homework which the contributors of this artcle should do before butchering the site.  
Spylab continues to post innuendos and personal attacks and offers nothing to back up these attacks. Before you start changing the pages and print stories as fact which are fiction, you should check your facts.  Talk to distributors, DJs and not to bands that entered the scene years later.  The Hardcore page should give a chronological history of what evolved in all cities and where the roots are.  Unless you were there, you can not fully understand the impact of the "Rotten To The Core" album on the scene and what was to follow for years to come.  It was a turning point for Hardcore in NYC and it opened to door for new bands for years to come even though they may have not appeared on the album.  To date "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" & "A Diet Fore the Worms" LP remains a staple in NYC hardore history.    
It sounds like you have a personal vendetta against Sallese, Ism and Hurchella.  Do yourself and everyone else a favor and don't let your prejudices get in the way of the truth.  Stop the personal attacks.
PUNKNYC
Those are only "facts" because you say so, Bob Sallese. You are not the be all and end all of hardcore punk history. Wikipedia is not obligated to post content just because you say it's true, without any outside references. I have not posted any personal attacks against you. I'm not the only one who disagrees with your edits to the hardore punk article (and the associated talk page). I'm also not the only one reversing those edits. Please stop posting lies and personal attacks on Wikipedia.  Spylab 17:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  JUST THE FACTS JACK ref NYC evloution of punk to hardcore 

message: A group of articles on songs by Minor Threat are up for deletion. You may be interested in adding to the discussion. --Switch 14:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD on Minor Threat songs 

message: Although most of the info in the article is true, some of it is potentially not. Every statement about a living person needs to be properly cited and sourced with a direct reference. This will not only bring the article up to Wikipedia standards, it will help to quell the edit-warring between editors who share differing opinions about who did what, and how important they were. wikipediatrix 21:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia policy clearly states: "Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth". It's not about "two sides" or "right and wrong", it's about whether the statements made in this article can be backed up with valid verifiable sources as per WP:V and WP:RS. That needs to be addressed first and then people can argue about whether some sources are being given undue weight. wikipediatrix 21:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources, sources, sources 

message: *Your editors continue to make the article a joke.  If you take out all brief explanations of key players and leave no links then what would be the point to have more detailed seperate bios and articles.  As it stands, all references to Pat Duncan, Tim Sommer, Bob Sallese, Ben Manilla, Jack Rabid have been omitted.  Yet Rodney Bigenheimer & Tim Yohannon info stays.  This is a very one-sided article.  These names were equally important in NYC as were Bigenheimer & Yohannon were on the West Coast.  The beginning of the article is a joke too..."Hardcore originated in North America, primarily in and around California, Texas, and Washington, DC, although Chicago, Detroit, New York City, Vancouver, and Boston were also important."  What the fuck!@#$@#$%^&&&?????????  This is a total OPINION!!!!...and in my opinion....California, NYC, DC, & Boston were the most important places.  To write this article suggesting Texas & Vancouver were more important than NYC or Boston is a joke!
::Tsk, tsk. Watch your language. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 13:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No sources, no info. Period. Take it to arbitration if you feel differently. wikipediatrix 19:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sounds like you're threatening to vandalize the article by trying to make a WP:POINT. Not every sentence in an article has to be sourced, but the ones that make key proclamations do. In other words, the intro paragraph's statement that Hardcore Punk songs are "short, loud and passionate" doesn't need a source because it's the common sense definition of the subject itself, in the same way we don't need to prove that water is wet. We DO, however, need sources on statements that make claims about the importance of someone or something within the subject. If that means that, for a time, the article does not reflect the true and complete history of hardcore punk, or that certain people are slighted by their omission, that is unfortunate - but anyone who wants to fix that can do so by getting some proper sources for that info. wikipediatrix 19:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Suit yourself. I tried to communicate with you about how to improve the article, but I'm done talking now. You've already said "this is a joke" so many times now that it would make a great drinking game, so if you can't discuss the article constructively, your disruptive comments are of no value here. I repeat, take it to arbitration if you feel I am in error. wikipediatrix 19:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Still needs to be more DC info. Minor Threat weren't formed in a bubble, DC was important to the scene. "DC hardcore punk" (without quotes) turns up quite a lot on Google:
http://www.silver-dragon-records.com/hardcore_punk.htm
http://www.mp3.com/genre/427/subgenre.html
http://www.fourfa.com/history.htm
http://experts.about.com/e/h/ha/Hardcore_punk.htm
http://www.bannedindc.com/
I know not all of these will be judged reliable sources but they're all off the first two pages. DC was extremely important for hardcore. I think the article must reflect this. Nach0king 20:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HARDCORE ARTICLE IS A ONE-SIDED FAIRYTALE PR PAGE FOR A SELECT GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS & BANDS 

message: KIDS TODAY!!!! HARDCORE ORIGiNATED IN NORTH AMERICA?????!!! have you ever heard of the sex pistols, clash, crass,buzzcocks?????... HELLO!!! punk came out of  england in the late 70's. if music is so important to you, open you ears and learn your rock history...
--Liftychk 10:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Know your rock history 

message: My last three edits (October 10) were fixing up things like sentence and paragraph structure, writing style, grammar, links, citations, order and similar issues. I did not add or delete any factual content. Many of those improvements had been done before, but got reverted in the edit war. Please do not change any of those things without justification.Spylab 22:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Just so my recent improvements don't get destroyed...

message: Please not e that the article page is now protected unitl the RFC is resolved, as the edit warring hasn't stopped.  Rich Farmbrough, 20:11 18  October 2006 (GMT).
*It looks like the edit war will continue, now that PunkNYC has reinserted the content that was the cause of the edit war in the first place. Spylab 13:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: *Breakdown (-core) - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breakdown (-core)
*Hardcore dancing was edited to reference hardcore emo, not hardcore punk. 
*Punk dance needs work. 
Paul foord 15:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breakdown article up for AFD, Hardcore dancing was PRODed - both need work 

message: I'm not heaps familiar with the history of hardcore punk. I hear hardcore punk bands all the time at local gigs, but I don't own any eary hardcore albums...so I'm asking, in the intro, why it says the hardcore emerged from great britain, and yet later the 'big 3' hardcore bands are listed as DK, Minor Threat and Bad Brains...all from the US. And, from doco's I've seen, Hank the Tank claims hardcore was an american east coast thing that spread to california and shit. Can anyone justify why great britain is mentioned as starting it? I'll go ahead and change the intro myself, unless anyone can explain to me why it should be reverted. (Justinboden86 12:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: as you know, HARDCORE IS NOT PUNK! there is nothing punk about it. punk, like green day, takes little musical talent while bands like As I Lay Dying and It Dies Today write their songs and lyrics with a passion in mind. Musical ability is derived from passion, passion is derived from emotion, and emotion is derived from events around a person. And the UK article was right KNOW YOUR MUSIC! you should be banned from wikimedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BFMV1020 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So what were you hoping to achieve with that statement?  Feel free to post some constructive criticism... hellboy 01:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  HARDCORE IS NOT PUNK 

message: Fear was a pretty big band in the scene in the early eighties. Why no mention? Also, shouldn't Fear's Saturday Nigh Live appearance be mentioned somehow? As a moment that showed mainstream America what was going on in with this new music (new at the time)?Dpetley 17:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Little/no mention of Fear, Lee Ving, or the SNL incident 

message: I took the liberty of replacing one of the music samples. I removed the link to Dead Kennedy's "Holiday in Cambodia" and replaced it with Bad Brains "Pay to Cum", which I think is a much clearer example of hardcore punk music. In fact, I really don't think the pre-In God We Trust DKs are hardcore punk at all, but rather, are a good example of pre-hardcore American punk. (With IGWT, of course, their sound changed noticeably.) Peter G Werner 09:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music samples 

message: Feel free to debate this with me, but I can't tell you when I will reply. You guys can adress me as Chuck Phantom
I took a look at some of the peoples posts on here. A lot of people are oblivious to things that I notice fast. Generally, styles of music ending with the suffix Core (Grindcore, Metalcore, Moshcore) regardless of what they sound like are related to Hardcore Punk Rock and therefore belong in the Punk realm. People have things like Hardcore, and Emo incorrect. Emo was orriginally the Washington D.C. Hardcore scenes EmoCore music starting around 1985, with Rites of Spring as the originator, and followed up with bands like Fire Party. Emo bands started going into an Indie Emo sound in the early 90s and eventually went mainstreem into a style close to the sound of PowerPop that people call Emo today.
What people call Hardcore nowadays, regardless of how different it sounds than Hardcore Punk, is still related to Hardcore Punk, just like it is analagous to Metalcore and Grindcore, also still coming from punk, just like Grindcore is analagous to Crust-Punk or Stenchcore or whatever you want to call it. The fact is, all these bands that you are all calling Hardcore has another subgenre of it's own called Moshcore, which has a page on answers.com which you should all take a look at. You will find the material that you see on that page quite familiar. People adressed Hardcore Punk as Hardcore in the 80s before these Moshcore bands started coming around. Samething with the Hardcore Scene. 
When you ask people what they listen to and they respond with Hardcore, you ask them about it and they call it simply "Hardcore". I asked a person what she meant and she said "Hardcore Music". And all these subgenres fit into primary genres of Rock and Roll. There's Hard Rock, Punk Rock, Metal, Agressive Rock, Soft Rock, Folk Rock, and prime Subgenres like that. There's no music simply called Hardcore that's one step down of Rock and Roll music.
Moshcore, Metalcore, Grindcore, Goregrind, Thrashcore, Skacore, Queercore, Skatecore, Emocore, Screamo, they all have pretty unique sounds and are still all right out of Hardcore Punk Rock. 
You've probably heard a few Death Rock bands. Tell me, what genre is Death Rock a subgenre of? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.87.235.145 (talk) 07:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suffix: CORE 

message: there should be a portland hardcore page. Oregon that is. Poison idea and shit.--71.236.239.19 07:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portland Hardcore. 

message: Just browsed through the article and noticed one glaring omission...Bad Religion isn't mentioned anywhere. I don't know much Hardcore punk, but I have heard that they were an important hardcore punk band in the 80's, and almost single-handedly saved punk in the 90's. I don't if this is true, but someone should investigate.
I did notice their label is mentioned (Epipith (sp?), which was created by the band. Ledzeppelin19 23:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Religion? 

message: This definition of hardcore punk is not satisfactory.  Hardcore is always hardcore punk.  It will always have more in common with punk than metal as it is a subgenre of punk.  Any bands that "have more in common with metal" are therefore metal.  There are many screamo band who call themselves metalcore (a nonexistent genre made to associate these groups with the hardcore scene simply for street cred which many metal bands do not and cannot have) or hardcore.  Metalcore shares no characteristics of hardcore in that it is not punk.  It is simply metal with harder, possibly "reminiscent of hardcore" style vocals.  I saw DMIZE, Madball, and Merauder referred to as metalcore bands which is something that they would completely deny as they are or were solidly members of the hardcore scene.
Using Michael Azerrad as a source on Hardcore is like using a country music reporter to talk about hip hop.  Michael Azerrad may be an expert on popular music but he is not qualified to explain a scene that he does not belong to and NEVER belonged to.  Even if much of his knowledge is based on studies and watching a documentary it will never compensate for the "Feeling in your heart" when u listen to the music and dance in the pit.  The brotherhood we have cannot be bought it must be felt.  This scene is underground and underground is where we want it to stay.  It needs to remain free from the bullshit definitions given on the space up above.  It might seem petty but it ain't petty to me.
Jcnyhc 22:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I dispute this definition of hardcore punk 

message: I have to take Matthew Fennell's side on this: why does the InfoBox say hardcore originated in the "early 1980s" when you have Black Flag, the Bad Brains, the Dead Kennedy's, and the Misfits all forming in 1977-1978, The Germs most influential record release in 1979, etc? Clconway 19:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural Origins 

message: Death By Stereo and comeback kid are hardcore punk, black flag is hardcore punk to, but the only song I heard like comeback kid and dead by stereo is the song depressions, can someone, the others song I have by black flag are like the song I love you or fix me, can someone explain me why are to different kinds of hardcore punk are of the same genere?
*To answer your question:
:Note that DBS and Comeback Kid are relatively young bands. Black Flag started out in the early eighties. That's a long time (about 20 years) for the genre to have evolved, and any band that's formed since then may have some similar influences but sound completely different. This is like how any band today described as pop-rock doesn't mean they sound like the Beatles, etc. Just because two bands are listed in the same genre doesn't mean that they sound exactly alike.
:Also, please take note in the future that Talk pages are meant to discuss the creation and/or maintaining of the article and not the article's subject. Thank you. TheLetterM 23:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  gotta question