Talk:List of 1970s punk rock musicians

message: The Tubes?  --  Punk? Does anybody else think so? Sjfloat 16:56 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)
: On further reading, probably not - I'll take them off the list. I didn't know much about them, still don't know quite enough to write an article, though they sound sorta interesting. Now - Adam and the Ants, punk???? Does anybody else think so? (New Romantic IMHO). GRAHAMUK 04:43 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)
:: I rather liked The Tubes first album. They were intentionally a sort of parody. But I still thought their stuff was pretty great. Maybe I'm among those that they were poking fun at. :)  I can't help thinking that the name of what was probably their most popular tune, 'White Punks on Dope', may have contributed to the supposed punk association.  But a quick listen to their music dispels any such idea. They were in a sense rebelling (or at least critically commenting) against the 70's AOR institution and pop culture in general, but stylewise they exhibited the very bombast and excess that punk rose up to overthrow; and again, this was probably part of the joke (though I still think they performed it pretty well). As far as Adam and the Ants go, the stuff I'm familiar with I would not call punk. But I think they may have had a punkier, somewhat more obscure history, i.e. before their pop radio days. Someone more knowledgeable should weigh in on this.Sjfloat 17:49 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Something else to point out, a lot of bands mentioned and noted, though great, were definitely not part of the first wave, and wow, I mean for california alone, a lot of first wave bands are missing and a lot of second wave bands have taken their place.
It's amazing with the vast resources that the internet and collectors have to offer, that great bands from labels like Dangerhouse are missing.
Where are the Randoms? Where's Black Randy and the Metrosquad? 
PLEASE DO RESEARCH BEFORE MAKING A HORRIBLE LIST LIKE THIS!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.103.204 (talk) 20:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Early discussions

message: Black Flag was arguably a good, genuine punk band. But I wouldn't put them in the 'First Wave'. Both the London and NY scenes (and probably DC's, I guess) were pretty mature by the time they showed up. Right? Weren't they more Second Wave, hardcore, L.A.? Might say the same or similar of DK, The Germs, The Dickies, etc.
:I think the person who added that was referring to the original black flag line-up with Keith Morris of the Circle Jerks, before Rollins showed up. That line-up released a Nervous Breakdown EP in 1978, which was definatley early enough to be first wave. Meltingwax 17:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. 71.68.17.30 18:03, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Later...

message: Orange County punk band Channel 3 must have been an oversight on your part.
:Yes, Channel 3 was a punk band prior to their awful "Airborne" album.  The CD "The Skinhead Years" offers a good retrospective.  I have returned them to their rightful place on the list. Gaohoyt 00:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Channel 3 

message: Of course this is arguable, but the First Wave of Punk is 74-78.  Some even argue that it ended when "Never Mind the Bullocks..." was released (Sex Pistols) because of it's effect upon the idea of punk itself.  It became a fashion.  I suggest at least excluding any band formed after 78 in the First Wave List of Punk Bands.
Matthewbtyler 20:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Consensus for this article seems to agree that the timespan covered is 76-80, hence reverted deletions of Crass, Black Flag, etc quercus robur 21:34, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: First Wave Time Period

message: I'm deleting bands without Wikipedia articles, bands that started in 1980 or later, bands that aren't really punk rock, and bands that aren't notable. I'm also adding headings and alphabetizing it better.Spylab 13:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep your dirty mits off unless you're willing to write some articles for those bands. 71.68.17.30 18:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleaning up

message: There needs to be strickly seperate lists for punk rock and hardcore bands, the current list pretends hardcore is punk, when the two are different forms of must. - Deathrocker 00:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The're not different.  Hardcore is a subgenre of punk rock.  WesleyDodds 13:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're very different... If you're going to see genres that way, realize that you can start equating The Circle Jerks with Elvis Presley. 71.68.17.30 18:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Seperate lists

message: I've added The Rings and The Worst. The Rings are pretty well known. From London, included Twink and Alan Lee Shaw - played Mont-de-Marsan in 1977. Single I wanna be free. The Worst are more obscure. From Manchester they tried to top everybody else with ramshackle amateurism. I saw them at the London Roundhouse, maybe with The Buzzcocks. Both bands require disambig before linking.Wwwhatsup 16:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Adds

message: these were the bands that formed well before the first wave of punk and were cited as big influences by the first wave and would have been classified as punk had they formed later.
they include: the stooges, new york dolls, velvet underground, mc5, (and possibly others).  
Ad1mt (talk) 16:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: pre-punk or the godfathers of punk

message: It is no wonder the factual accuracy of the article is disputed. A good proportion of the bands listed are NOT in the first wave of punk music. The list either needs stricter editing OR the article should be re-named (something like 'List of punk musicians performing in the 1970s'). Yozzer66 (talk) 21:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seriously.  XTC???  Good band, but whoever listed them as punk, let alone first wave punk, has absolutely no idea what they are talking about.  This is just plain silly.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.158.223.4 (talk) 14:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This list needs stricter editing

message: I've started a deletion dicussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of musicians in the first wave of punk rock - not necessarily because I think it should be deleted, but because I don't think it's possible to objectively define who or what constitutes the "first wave". So deletion, a good source that shows there's a generally-accepted definition, renaming, or perhaps something else - not sure what I think the solution is. But please do offer any thoughts you might have. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I will see what kind of magic i can pull  editing wise --Guerillero | My Talk  14:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion Discussion 

message: I've renamed the article, as decided by consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of musicians in the first wave of punk rock -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I will see what kind of magic i can pull  editing wise --Guerillero | My Talk  14:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Conclusion

message: This article is mis-named. A musician is a person; this should be a list of people who play punk rock music. Instead, it is almost exclusively contains punk rock bands.
Why isn't it called "List of 1970s punk rock bands"? -- Dan Griscom (talk) 02:01, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "... musicians"? No, "bands".