Talk:List of alternative rock artists

message: Please tell me why My Chemical Romance isn't on this list, look at their Wikipedia page, it clearly describes them as such.  I know My Chemical Romance is disliked by a lot of people, but the point of this page is to include Bands that are described as such.  If you don't believe they shouldn't be on here, give me a reason why and give a better genre to describe them as, and don't say shitty emo or something like that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.152.168.33 (talk) 03:59, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: My Chemical Romance

message: I'm not so sure U2 belongs on this list. Can anyone varify that they do? -- LGagnon 21:14, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
:The fact you are even debating if U2 should be on this list worries me.
Oasis & Offspring do NOT belong on this list either, these two bands are top 40 mainstream rock, they are the virtual personifaction of the top 40 genre  If they are going to remain on this list we might as well add Phil Collins, Spin Doctors, Creed, Live etc. 
And please explain why Devo & New Order were removed & these two bands(above) were returned to the list. -- 203.13.126.19
::You know, there really hasn't been any attempt to give a strict definition of what bands belong on this list and which don't. Some people do consider Oasis & Offspring alternative, even though they don't belong on the list. And people keep on adding bands that, IMO, don't belong and don't fit a strict definition of alternative. Maybe we should decide on such a definition? -- LGagnon 04:01, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't any band which has its own wiki on wikipedia and either lists alternative rock in its genre section OR lists genres which are in turn listed as subgenres of alternative rock on the alternative rock wiki, be listed?  Couldn't this provide a clear cut decision? (Since only notable bands are allowed wikis anyway, and whatever genre they belong to is discussed on their particular band wiki pages).Bethgranter 15:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: U2

message: People keep on adding garage rock revival bands to this article when they do not belong here. Let's take this into account before we add The Hives, The White Stripes, The Strokes, or any other garage rock revival acts in here again. -- LGagnon 19:09, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
I agree, although these bands maybe alternative as well as Garage, Garage is a more appropriate category for these bands & describes their style better than just alternative. Khanada July 15, 2005
It depends.  Garage rock revival bands may be simply that: garage rock revival bands.  But bands that establish their careers in the indie underground scene and have definite roots in alternative rock styles and artists (such as the Strokes and White Stripes) do belong here, or at least in a list of indie rock artists. WesleyDodds 01:58, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a subgenre of rock in general.  It's been around since the 1960s. WesleyDodds 00:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Garage rock]] is not alternative

message: User:69.170.186.201 just added a bunch of punk and new wave bands to the list. Should we keep these, or do they belong in their own list? Many of these don't seem to fit what would normally be called "alternative". -- LGagnon 01:53, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
Let me ask you, do you think some groups can be on two lists? I don't see why not. User talk:Khanada 02:00 August 04, 2005 (UTC)
Well, I think they should be listed here, so good, even though they are not listed as subgenres of alternative rock on the main 'alternative rock' wiki page (but I think that's wrong too!)Bethgranter 16:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a case-by-case basis.  A band like the The Cure can be classified as numerous genres, and many punk bands in America evolved into an alternative rock sound.  But punk and New Wave don't belong as subgenres of alternative; it's a classification sometimes used when discussing the topic of alternative by itself, but such a classification ignores the differences and relations between the genres, and sources that consider the entire history of rock music don't group them together.  Because, really, New Wave by and large has nothing to do with alternative rock; they developed along different paths.  Not to mention there's just as many people who if they're going to group it all together are more prone to call everything "punk" instead of "alternative".  WesleyDodds 04:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Punk and New Wave

message: This article is being destroyed. It's now one of those articles that proves Larry Sanger right when he said that Wikipedia sucks because expertise is not respected. So many bands that never deserved the title of alternative or ever came close to being alternative are constantly added to this list. When I started this list, real alternative bands were added with consideration for whether or not they do count taken when adding them. Now, people who don't know anything about music are ruining this article. It's becoming a lost cause because of the rampant lack of education and expertise (and in some cases, common sense) amongst the editors of Wikipedia on the subject matter. As it stands, the article doesn't provide what it is supposed to. It has become the embodiment of Wikipedia's lack of knowledgable editors, and unwillingness to respect them. -- LGagnon 03:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please clarify with examples WesleyDodds 06:46, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Ok, I see what you're talking about now.  But that's more an issue of people screwing around rather than a deliberation on whether or not certain artists listed belong in the Alternative genre.  I did re-add the disputed accuracy tag when I did a revert in order to clean up some of the vandalism you missed, but I really don't think it's necessary to tag this page as such.  The issue is people acting like jerks.  If people keep vandalising the page, I'll just fix it right back, no problem. WesleyDodds 06:55, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: More misinformation from useless editors & the destruction of this article

message: Alternative rock? Or not?
:I'd say yes, but only tentatively.  WesleyDodds 10:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  M.I.A. 

message: Why are the All American Rejects on this page?
:Well, they're not a punk band, so they belong here.  WesleyDodds 04:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wut the Hell?

message: Would System of a Down, Good Charlotte, Avril Lavigne, or Avenged Sevenfold count as alternative rockers? And if any of them, which ones?--Mr. Brain 04:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: SoaD is nu-metal. Avril is pop. Can't remember what the other 2 sound like, but as far as I remember I wouldn't count them either. -- LGagnon 15:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Of those listed, only Keane and the Fray belong.  WesleyDodds 21:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I second WesleyDodds's opinion, since Linkin Park and Korn are nu metal, Bendulum 21:34, 05 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative or not alternative? 

message: Why didn't anyone put Type O Negative or Porcupine Tree on the list? If Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Tool, R.E.M. and Smashing Pumpkins can make the list, then I can add Porcupine Tree & Type O Negative.--Mr. Brain 17:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't knwo who Porcupine Tree are.  Type O Negative seem to fit pretty well under heavy metal.  WesleyDodds 21:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's going on here? 

message: And one more thing. Type O Negative may be metal, but they're also alternative metal. If they're gothic or alternative, they can't be deleted. And Phish is alternative rock, too. Thank you--Mr. Brain 16:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not so sure this "alternative metal" is actually an alt rock genre. From what I've seen of bands that get this odd label, they are always much more metal than alt. I'm removing them again until you can give a better justification. -- LGagnon 21:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Vocals aside (which are not the only reason The Cure & Siouxsie get the gothic label), the rest of the music is metal. Maybe they have "gothic" looks, but so does Slayer by some accounts. -- LGagnon 22:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  And one more thing... 

message: there is a great deal of red links of questionable unknown bands on the list that may be spam
"The Electric Jets, Evansblue , The Motion Sick , Nerveline , New Season, Oscar Trim, P, Perpetua , Platinum Head, Ribbed 4 Her Pleasure, Royal Fanclub, Splinter, Th' Faith Healers, Unstep, Until Escape, Zach Hoel and the Flawless Victories, and Zephoria."
can anyone account for these bands?
--Pantophobia 06:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed several redlinks.  If I made a mistake and removed a notable band that just happens not to have an article yet, let me know.  The first step to including a notable band on this list should be (ideally) to create an article for them if one doesn't exist. janejellyroll 02:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  red links 

message: This is a list of alt rock bands, but I see in the list also bands from other genres like post rock, dark-wave, trip hop, indie, even metal and gothic... we should clean up the list. What do you think? Connacht 17:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Goth, post-rock and "indie" are alternative rock genres.  WesleyDodds 17:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  maybe a clean-up is needed? 

message: Shouldn't The Feeling be in this list too? I think they're kinda alternative...
the feeling is classical rock  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.93.158.8 (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Feeling 

message: Someone keeps adding Tool to the list, which is ridiculous. They are considered by some to be an Alternative Metal band, but they are the furthest thing from Alternative Rock. People with no understanding of musical genres should not be editing the list. Osmodius 07:33, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool 

message: The article Linkin Park states in its genres that Linkin Park is Alternative Rock, Nu-metal, Rapcore.
Even the article Alternative Rock states Linkin Park as one of Alternative Rock Bands!
So why not include them?
--~KnowledgeHegemony~ 18:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linkin park?

message: If Sonic Youth are on there, should Ciccone Youth not be put on there as well? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ALCUS36 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  If Sonic Youth.. 

message: Seeing as you seem to control this page, Wesley, I really am getting tired of war-ing with you. So I'll make my peace and say one last time that you can't trust one website for every musical band in existance. When it comes to the fans, they tend to know the music best.
I agree that industrial rock is a form of alternative rock reason for why I left Nine Inch Nails unaltered. 
Einstürzende Neubauten however is industrial music which is experimental and sometimes even electronic.
Ministry is an industrial metal, still not industrial rock.
Nitzer Ebb? An EBM band, why were they ever considered rock when EBM is industrial dance music?
If you keep re-adding these bands then what stops you from adding SPK, Coil, Test. Dept, KMFDM etc.? Every musical band is alternative rock, when you put it that way.  (Skinnydrifter (talk) 12:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First off, "Seeing as you seem to control this page" is not a comment that assumes good faith. Ignoring that, All Music is one of the more reliable music sources. Given the difficulty in defining industrial music as a whole (I've read many sources that make no distinction between "industrial music" and "industrial rock"), I'm willing to conceed Einstürzende Neubauten and Nitzer Ebb to an extent (although Einstürzende Neubauten's later material does get into more standard rock formats, but whatever . . .) but Ministry is consistenly referred to specifically as an alternative rock band. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Oh, and yeah, KMFDM would belong here. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: KMFDM would actually fit here, so that was a bad example. Apologies for the rudeness. (Skinnydrifter (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: All Music Guide

message: Before you badmouth me for wanting to add Tool to this list, let me just point something out. Faith No More, Jane's Addiction, Rage Against the Machine, Finger Eleven, and Breaking Benjamin are on this list of alternative rock bands. Also, someone said it was OK to add a few more alt-metal bands(not all of them, but some true alternative bands). In other words, would you please stop deleting Tool from this list? Thank you. Mr. Brain (talk) 04:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tool aren't alt-rock. This has been brought up both here and on the Tool talk page. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Would you stop doing that?

message: "Hybrid Theory" may not be an alternative rock album, but it certainly does have some alternative sounding songs, such as Pushing Me Away, My December, and Runaway. "Meteora" might not be an alternative rock album either, but they do have some songs of that genre: Somewhere I Belong, Easier To Run, Faint, Breaking The Habit, and Numb. And to say that Chester Bennington screams in a few songs, doesn't make them Screamo. And to say the Mike Shinoda raps, doesn't make them Hip Hop. The Red Hot Chili Peppers singer raps in a few of his songs, they're not Nu Metal, now are they? Then, Linkin Park's "Minutes To Midnight" is Alternative Rock. Now who in their logical mind can argue that Linkin Park is not alternative rock? I will check this article every single day to make sure that they are considered Alternative Rock. Why? Because I'm right, and Wikipedia users need to make the best logical choices. If you keep on taking down Linkin Park, I will take down the Red Hot Chili Peppers, or any other band that has rapping style vocals and electric guitars. Unless there is clear evidence, in the definition of what an Alternative Rock band "isn't", then I will keep on making sure Linkin Park is on the list. Thank you so much.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Linkin Park aren't alternative rock. They're a nu metal band.
WesleyDodds (talk) 06:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Linkin Park "was" a Nu-Metal band. Their newer albums Minutes to Midnight, A Thousand Suns, and Living Things are all indeed Alternative. I have added Linkin Park to the list, and unless you have a Legitimate  reason, don't remove them.
Excuse me. A few Hybrid Theory songs sound alternative. A few Meteora songs sound alternative. AND, Minutes to Midnight is Alternative rock. Hmmm..., I will keep on adding Linkin Park to the list. So, have fun keeping up with me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JCStreetSoldier1234 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

text: "A few songs sound alternative". According to who?  What do you mean by "sound alternative"? WesleyDodds (talk) 21:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

text: None of your assertations are based on reliable, verifiable sources. And it's irrelevant that one of their songs won a Grammy for best rock song. This topic has come up before elsewhere; Linkin Park isn't alternative rock. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Linkin Park is not primarily an alternative rock band; they are a nu metal band. The genres of other bands on this list is irrelevant to the discussion (by the way those are all alt-rock bands; the only ones I would question are Portishead and Blink-182). Unless you back up your argument with sources, Linkin Park doesn't belong here. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.billboard.com/column/chartbeat/linkin-park-logs-10th-alternative-songs-1004137261.story chew on this for a while then come back with a legitimate reason to remove them  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.21.91 (talk) 01:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia can't use itself as a source. And no, it's not common sense. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Myspace.com is not a reliable source; and the band itself isn't either when it comes to categorising genre. An award nominee listing is also unreliable, because it's in the interest of the award committee to expand the criteria of "alternative rock" to fit as many bands as possible. Its unclear how the Metacritic source's genre was arrived at, and anyway, "alternative, rock" is not the same as "alternative rock". CloudNine (talk) 09:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

text: The thing, it would be pretty easy to find a reliable source that said Michael Jordan played basketball (try the New York Times). Can I see this ocean-full of information? The sources you've supplied so far aren't too reliable. The onus is on you to prove Linkin Park is alternative rock, since you're the one that wants to include the band. CloudNine (talk) 00:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Linkin Park is indeed Alternative Rock

message: All it does is make people argue. Also, please tell me a rock band that Nickelback is alternative to. 124.169.253.131 (talk) 19:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This page is bad

message: WTF? Tokio Hotel? Alternative Rock??? They're just shit! And so tell me why a punk rock band like The Offspring should be an Alternative Rock band and Three Days Grace not. This article is ready for dying!
Tokio Hotel is the German version of the Jonas Brothers. There is absolutely nothing "alternative" about them.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ParadoxBacklash (talk • contribs) 15:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Argh!!!

message: If anyone plans on cleaning up the list, I'd like to suggest refraining from adding artists that can be easily classified as one specific genre. For example, Ministry is widely identified by the consensus as an industrial metal band, 3 Doors Down a post-grunge band, and The Offspring a pop-punk band. Try shortening the list down to artists that don't have specific genres going for them (Radiohead, The Flaming Lips, Anberlin) or have an outstanding importance to the development of Alt history despite being called other genres (R.E.M., Sonic Youth, Nirvana, The Cure). As for artists that can be called radio alternative bands (Nickelback), they can be linked via a "See Also: post-grunge, britpop, etc". Otherwise, it might be best to limit the list to notable alternative acts. BreakerLOLZ (talk) 15:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advice for Cleaning Up 

message: What's up with this cat? Who does he think he is?
I spent quite a bit of time adding new bands to the list and this clown went through and removed every single one of them, and replaced them with crappy, mainstream radio pop that isn't the slightest bit alternative in any sense of the word.
How about this, man. Leave my edits alone and keep your crappy kiddie-pop bands off the list. The list doesn't need to be comprehensive, but it should at least be accurate.
Bands that are NOT alternative:
*Creed
*Nickelback
*My Chemical Romance
*Tokio Hotel
*3 Doors Down
*The Academy Is
*The All American Rejects
*All Time Low
*Hootie & The Blowfish
*Matchbox 20
*Alanis Morissette
*Panic At The Disco
*The Rasmus
*The Used
*Cinema Bizarre
These bands do not belong anywhere near this list, and if you honestly believe that they do, you don't know a damn thing about music. Even at the height of alternative's mainstream popularity in the mid 90's, nobody with more than two brain cells ever considered Alanis or Hootie to be anything other than mainstream corporate pop music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ParadoxBacklash (talk • contribs) 13:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Without discussing the merits of particular artists, I strongly advise you to consider wikipedia standards regarding civility and personal attacks before making any further comments like the above. Also, given the inherently contentious questions about whether or not particular bands/genres belong here, and the constant additions of bands that don't belong, it is a minor miracle any experienced editor bothers to police this article at all. I suspect you would find it in far worse shape without WesleyDodds' efforts. --CAVincent (talk) 04:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt it could get much worse than it already is. This is quite literally, one of the worst genre lists on wikipedia, thanks in no small part to the extremely ill informed and misguided efforts of Mr. Dodds. ParadoxBacklash (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

text: For starters, Nickelback, Matchbox 20, Creed are post-grunge. Sure they suck and are very mainstream, but they are still alt-rock groups. That applies to the rest. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ignoring the fact that post-grunge is not "alt-rock" in any way, that doesn't answer the question of why you removed all of my edits, which added a good number of actual alternative bands, apparently just because you've never heard of them. Proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you know a lot less about music than you claim to. How about a compromise? You leave my edits alone, leave the bands I added in place, and go ahead and add your tacky, non-alternative corporate crap-rock back to the list and I won't delete them. ParadoxBacklash (talk) 14:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Post-grunge is indeed an alt-rock subgenre; sources are unanimous on this. Not to be blunt, but I have a pretty indepth knowledge of the genre, as my years of work on Wikipedia can assest to. We can't add every alt-rock band here, only seminal ones. And a few you've tried to add (Evanesence) aren't al-rock at all. Also, you've been formatting links incorrectly (remove underscores and alphabetize solo artists by last name, not first). WesleyDodds (talk) 04:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoa, whoa, whoa son. I did NOT add Evanescence, I added stuff like Pylon and Julian Cope. Maybe I've been formatting links incorrectly. My bad. Fix it instead of deleting it. Every single thing I have added is indeed alternative. And how the HELL are Nickelback, Matchbox 20 or My Chemical Romance "seminal" in the slightest? They're derivative crap, none of them have done anything original or influential. I think you need to look up what the word seminal actually means. Now on to my next point. What exactly is post-grunge an alternative to? Do you understand where the term alternative came from originally? If watered down, boring, vanilla garbage like Nickelback is "alt rock", what do you consider just rock? Nickelback has more in common with mainstream rock bands like AC/DC or Forgeigner than they do with The Pixies, Sonic Youth, or even Nirvana. Aside from the fact that the term alternative has been essentially meaningless since about 1994, why don't you explain that one to me. About the "We can't add every alt-rock band here, only seminal ones", did you miss where I said, the list doesn't need to be comprehensive, but it should be accurate? Yeah, well the way you've got it, it's about as far from accurate as it can get. ParadoxBacklash (talk) 12:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WesleyDodds 

message: Since Hootie and the Blowfish still remains on this list after all this various brouhaha...well....I don't even know what to make of that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.27.6.143 (talk) 09:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That group is noted by Allmusic in its Adult Alternative Pop/ Rock article a label it described as a branch of alternative rock. We do have a separate  list for that Edkollin (talk) 16:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Hootie and the Blowfish

message: The fact that AFI is an alternative rock band has been stated in a majority of wikipedia articles pertaining to them. In fact thier own wikipedia page also states that they are an alternative rock band. Therefore, shouldn't they be added to the list ?
LPfreak101 (talk) 13:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly agree with this proposition. The band has very strong punk roots, and though their musical style has changed alot, they still manage to be labelled as 'Alternative' by reviewers and bands alike for their diversity and uniqueness.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.167.214.3 (talk) 17:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: AFI

message: There are a few errors here and there. I may go through them at some point. --Limxzero (talk) 11:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alphabetization 

message: With the closure of the discussion on deletion, I am going to start adding citations, starting with the easiest ones. We might also usefully consider how the list is organised and what information to give.--SabreBD (talk) 07:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding citations

message: This thing where they are Nu metal/rap rock only applies to their first 2 albums. In general they are an Alternative Rock Band. Why would you classify their latest 2 albums Nu Metal/Rap rock? Please stop deleting them from the list since they are in fact Alternative. I mean they are more Alternative then some of the others on the list and those arent removed  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Handsprime (talk • contribs) 04:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are not going to get anywhere appealing to people just to listen to the music. Editors opinions are completely irrelevant to editing Wikipedia. Find reliable sources that say Linkin Park is alternative rock or claim that nu-matel, rap metal etc is part of Alternative Rock.  This link goes to a basic outline of the concepts of verifiability and reliable sources with further links to more detailed explanations. Feel free to ask questions. Edkollin (talk) 21:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Linkin park IS Alternative. It is common sense. Their nu metal/rap rock is only for their first 2 albums. Their later albums are Alternative rock. Its like saying Nine Inch Nails has always been Industral Metal when it was only a few albums
So do not delete them or we may have to lock the list.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Handsprime (talk • contribs) 06:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  You will never never get Linkin Park permanently on this list if you threaten others and insist that because you absolutely know by your superior common sense that they are alternative rock we will throw out 10 years of Wikipedia guidelines that say you must have a reliable source that says they are Alternative Rock. The shame of it is there is a case based on reliable sources that they belong here. You can do this for years somebody is always going to delete your entry. You figure it out or get out of the way if you want to see them have a long term place in the list.  209.225.141.253 (talk) 23:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: DO NOT DELETE LINKIN PARK!

message: Although it would be nice, I don't think bullet for my valentine is anywhere close to alternative rock.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.132.127.55 (talk) 16:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bullet for my Valentine 

message: This is what an article looks like when Wikipedia Guidelines are ignored. Everybody here just adds whatever the hell they want. The attitude is I know I am right because it is just so obvious, everybody knows that so and so act is alternative rock, why should I bother bother finding a reliable source?, let somebody else do it if they care so much.  BY THE WAY IF IT IS SO OBVIOUS ETC IT SHOULD TAKE ALL OF 5 OR 10 MINUTES TO FIND A RELIABLE SOURCE AND CITE THE ACT. There are editors that really do not know about the guidelines true, but when you see the same acts, many questionable, most not notable added over and over again it is usually vandalism. But shhhh can't say it you got to assume good faith. Good faith has it's place but it has come to be mean bending over backward to ass kiss the vandals or the just plain lazy. As much as I hate to do it I have to give credit where credit is due, these suckers are persistent with special "kudos" to Linkin Park fans.  It took years but their persistence has paid off. Those editors who cared about the guidelines  many of who have been trying to push back the onslaught sometimes on a daily bases for years have given up and gone home.
: Article is getting some editor attention stopping the deterioration but it is still horrible. Edkollin (talk) 22:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guideline Breakers win 

message: Mr. Bungle are not an alternative band, they're experimental, and they're not listed as alternative rock on their page, and there are no sources calling them alternative rock other than semi reliable allmusic. Helmet also need to be removed since they're more metal then they are alternative, If Helmet get to stay on this list then so should all the nu metal bands. I call the big one bitey (talk) 9:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Band's that need to be removed 

message: This has been an argument raging back and forth here for years and if we can ever get a consensus it would make editing a lot easier and make dealing with the acts listed above easier. Enough time has passed to reopen the topic. The argument for inclusion is that Heavy Metal is a form or subgenre of rock,  Allmusic and a plenty of reliable sources tell you that.  It seems common sense that and Alternative Metal would be a form  Alternative Rock. If adding Metal is Alt Rock (grunge) adding dance music is a form of Alt Rock (Acid House) why not Alt Metal's mix of genres? The arguments against are the lack of sourcing specifically saying "Alt Metal" is a form of Alt Rock (In my opinion this is because to the writers it is as obvious as saying the grass is green). The other argument is the original source not is punk but metal. My view leans towered including acts reliable sourced as Alt metal but not nu-metal because the latter at it's core is a rap-metal fusion that is too separated from the punk origins.   
As for experimental/all over the place acts Mr. Bungle or Kate Bush what Wikipedia does in put them in every list when they are unique and probably do not belong on any list. In my view if an artist has a one song or an album of a certain genre that does not make them an artist of that genre. Based on several years of editing my view is a fringe view. Edkollin (talk) 22:34, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nu Metal/Alt Metal sub-genre of Alternative Rock?  

message: Who ever wrote the alternative band page does not understand genres is probably not well versed in music. Very inaccurate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.124.203 (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Uneducated Author/Miscategorized

message: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweet_Water_(band) JustByteMe (talk) 07:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sweetwater 

message: Is Tracy Bonham or Crash Vegas notable enough to be on the list?Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 21:18, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing artists 

message: I went ahead and added Johnny Cash to the list because of his American Recordings albums. If you feel he is not alternative rock then feel free to remove him from the list.
2602:301:7765:5CF0:29C9:EEE4:790A:AB97 (talk) 18:35, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Johnny Cash's American Recordings Albums

message: Why are solo acts listed by first name? Does anyone else think this is a bad idea? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:51, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alphabetical order 

message: I just wanted to say that someone forgot Collective Soul. Loriann2708 (talk) 06:42, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You can add that band if you want.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:58, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another band 

message: I feel as though any band starting with "The" should be alphabetized under the letter the actual band name starts with (i.e. The Flaming Lips should be under "F"), especially since some of them already are (i.e. The Raveonettes are under "R"). If no one objects, I may clean this up in the near future. StuOnThis (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for this bold edit. I agree with your assessment.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:56, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The" bands alphabetized under "T" 

message: There's been a bit of a feud lately with whether or not Lorde should be added. Lorde is not listed in her own Wikipedia page as Alternative Rock. Personally, I'm not convinced she belongs here; I'd say she's simply pop. While I understand her music is commonly played on alternative rock radio stations, if she is to be added, a decent citation or two must come along with it. StuOnThis (talk) 14:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lorde 

message: Recently, a Christian alternative rock band was added and then removed. Personally, I'm fine with that since Christian music of any genre is usually kept pretty separate from their secular counterparts (it isn't normally played on alternative rock radio stations and it has its own section in record stores). However, to be fair, Christian alternative rock is listed as a subgenre of alternative rock and musically the only difference is its constant religious references in its lyrics. We may need to come to a definitive consensus about whether Christian alt-rock bands should be included. I vote no, although I'm open to them being there with an asterisk. StuOnThis (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Britpop, college rock, dream pop, emo, geek rock, gothic rock, grunge, indie rock, math rock, noise pop, nu gaze, post-Britpop, post-grunge, riot grrrl, post-punk revival, post-rock & shoegazing are all also listed as subgenres of alt rock but we don't list the artists from those genres here. As the person that reverted the IP earlier, I would be against adding christian alt rock bands to this list. Robvanvee 19:01, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "We don't list the artists from those genres here." We don't? I thought Alternative Rock was an umbrella term. Any of those sub-genres you listed would be simplified to Alternative Rock in terms of reference, and almost every artist/band in this list is identified as one or more of those sub-genres besides simply Alternative Rock. How on earth would a band be grunge but not Alternative Rock? It's like saying squares and rhombuses shouldn't be on a list of quadrilaterals. StuOnThis (talk) 13:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah quite right, that was a fucking stupid argument. Perhaps I let my personal aversion to christian alt rock cloud my better judgement so thanks for pointing that out. I guess it's pretty clear how I feel but your argument for the inclusion thereof also holds some merit. Robvanvee 16:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Trust me, the thought of Christian music on this list is pretty cringy to me, too. However, it is still technically alternative rock and I feel it wouldn't be right to exclude them. Further, even sticking an asterisk or cross character next to said bands might even be somewhat offensive and unnecessary now that I'm second-thinking it. I'd like to hear what other users think before we make any decisions, though. Assuming anyone else besides you and I watch this page nowadays, that is. StuOnThis (talk) 18:39, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian Alternative Rock: Should it be listed here? 

message: Sebastian Straw is an established and emerging artist in the world of alternative rock music. just search for him on google and digital music distributors  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.41.194.231 (talk) 12:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Until he's been established on Wikipedia with a page to link to, no. This is not an ad page for emerging artists. That being said, I hope to see him able to be legitimately added to this list one day. StuOnThis (talk) 14:23, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sebastian Straw