Talk:Screamo

message: Some editors have heavily resisted the inclusion of referenced information. Apparently any discussion of Thursday (band) and related bands is a big NO NO here (I wasn't aware...). Anyways, Although referring to these bands as screamo may fringe on breaking the balance of "the misuse of the term screamo," it IS appropriate to cite that many such bands reflect some attributes of screamo. Considering that editors have ALSO disputed any inclusion of information about Nintendocore and crunkcore (two well referenced notable genres that derive some influence from screamo), I lumped all of this information into a section called "Influence on other styles." HOPEFULLY people will stop vandalizing this page by removing such information. By putting it in this section, readers will be able to differentiate 'original' screamo from these styles that are merely influenced by some aspects of screamo. --♫ Chris-B-Koolio ♫ ... (Talk) 18:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the info about Thursday and all of the other bands mentioned in allmusic back up to the "modern screamo" section, as there is NO reason it shouldn't be there unless third-party sources question the bands mentioned, and even then, only the bands that are challenged should be moved. I think the rest was a good move on your part, though crunkcore is an actual screamo fusion, and should be mentioned as such.--3family6 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. I guess I was trying too hard to keep the peace with that other guy who kept vandalizing the page, lol. Referenced information is referenced information. --♫ Chris-B-Koolio ♫ ... (Talk) 19:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think one of the reasons for these problems is because screamo is a post-hardcore style, which explains bands like Thursday. I personally have almost no clue of how to distinguish one hardcore style from another, but I don't really need to because Wikipedia runs on sources.--3family6 (talk) 19:43, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

text: Yes! That definitely explains much of the confusion. Also a lot of die-hard fans of old screamo and emotional hardcore bands have a hard time allowing any other modern groups to be defined as such. But references are references. According to the sources on the article (including the Allmusic source) screamo defines an abrasive style of hardcore punk and emo. I think this page has been under the strict control of those "die-hard", stubborn, fans who don't accept references  for far too long. --♫ Chris-B-Koolio ♫ ... (Talk) 20:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed info

message: I think it might be time to give this page a serious rewrite. The way it currently reads sounds like it was written in the mid-2000s, when a lot of (fairly clueless) media outlets had gotten into the habit of calling any post-hardcore band with screaming in it "screamo." It got so bad at one point that people actually start using "real screamo" or "skramz" to refer to actual screamo bands, because the "screamo" name had become so diluted and meaningless.
In retrospect, that was a very silly time in music, and most people familiar with the genre now realize that screamo has a much more complicated definition than "music with screaming in it." Post-hardcore is post-hardcore, and screamo is screamo. Orchid, Seatia, pg.99, etc. are screamo. Senses Fail, Underoath, and Alexisonfire (all bands cited in the current screamo article) are not. Unfortunately, they can't simply be deleted, because there's valid-ish citations of media outlets from a few years ago calling those bands "screamo."
Instead of the way it currently is, the article should be rewritten to reflect the fact that screamo is a fairly narrowly defined genre, but that there was a period in the mid-to-late-2000s when the term was conflated with post-hardcore and some metalcore. This allows the history of this mis-usage to remain intact, but distinguishes between this and what is truly meant by the term screamo.
I'd be willing to help out with this rewrite, but I'm not going to waste my time if people are going to revert it back to its current state because of decade-old citations from oblivious media outlets. Hence, I'm asking other editors what they think should be done. Thoughts? EznorbYar (talk) 01:53, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: So then what makes screamo different from other types of rock that have screaming in it? I think this is your starting point. If you get a good, reliable, authoritative source on what makes screamo screamo, then that would help your cause. MidnightRequestLine (talk) 04:00, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time for an overhaul? 

message: Hi fellow editors! I reintroduced the section about the misuse of the term "screamo" and made some edits to the organization (the characteristics section primarily, which repeated several statements) without removing content. I think it's very important to retain a brief statement in the intro about the misapplication of the term "screamo" as an umbrella term for all music that features screamed vocals. I think that discourages further misapplication of the the term and clarifies why so many references exist claiming that a million and one bands are screamo, when they are in-fact practitioners of another genre entirely. If anyone has any comments ore suggested edits please discuss here. Thanks! -Chrisbkoolio (talk) 23:40, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, FYI, the characteristics section now has 4 examples: One of 1990s screamo, one of commercial 2000s screamo, one of mid 2000s contemporary screamo, and one of 2010s screamo-revival. All these are mentioned in citations either in the body (History section) or directly in the sound-file-box. It's important for readers to understand their relationship to the genre.--Chrisbkoolio (talk) 02:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Screamo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150319080400/http://emertainmentmonthly.com/2014/10/09/six-bands-bringing-respect-back-screamo-vocals/ to http://emertainmentmonthly.com/2014/10/09/six-bands-bringing-respect-back-screamo-vocals/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090305104850/http://www.brassland.org/ahb/writing/archives/2003/09/a_day_with_the.html to http://www.brassland.org/ahb/writing/archives/2003/09/a_day_with_the.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:29, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: May Crunkcore be added in Derivative forms? Dekai Averett (talk) 20:49, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I would definitely be opposed because there is no evidence of a link with the actual screamo sound which this article discusses (Heroin/Orchid/CTTS style screamo). The mere usage of high-pitched screams does not make crunkcore a derivative.--MASHAUNIX 15:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Bringing this back – I am definitely in favour of this section's removal. The source that's cited (the Guardian article) appears to be tongue-in-cheek / parody. If someone had taken the time to actually read it they might have noticed that. Sgnaf (talk) 14:29, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody's replied with anything to suggest that this is unwarranted, so I'm going to proceed in removing this. Sgnaf (talk) 06:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This makes sense to me. Thanks. Yilloslime (talk) 14:21, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crunkcore 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Screamo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524173030/http://www.thepunksite.com/interviews.php?page=thursday to http://www.thepunksite.com/interviews.php?page=thursday
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:22, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Crunkcore is listed as a derivative, this is a change I made a few months ago and I am fine with it being removed but it has to be discussed. I added it as a Derivative because it is sourced, though un-legitamently in some people's eyes, as being a fusion of Screamo and Crunk. Due to it not truly being a fusion genre to Screamo I added it as a Derivative. A Derivative is NOT a subgenre or fusion genre directly, it may take elements from another genre but is a different thing entirely. For example Post-punk is a Derivative to Punk rock because it is not Punk rock and it experiments far beyond the confines of Punk and Rock more broadly into Funk, Dub, Disco, Pop, Glam, and Electronic territories all while keeping Punk influence.  Dekai Averett (talk) 23:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd argue that, especially since the added clarification on the "definition of screamo" into the article, it makes sense to remove this term from the page. Perhaps moving it to somewhere more accurate? Also, I just looked through the sources for the page and they're clearly not reliable: 90 is the closest, being a Guardian article – that said, it refers to the genre as "screamo metal" which has quite an...interesting ring to it; 91 is mis-attrbuted to the NYT and About.com, instead it is actually a thoughtco article with no mention of crunk; both 92 & 93 are student-newspaper opinion articles (which are very poorly edited, I might add.) Methinks these are not generally accepted reliable sources, even in a scene which relies on a DIY ethos and all-ages effort. Sgnaf (talk) 06:14, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the errant citations. Also, whoever added this note is both melodramatic and seriously overstating their case: "Do not remove this mention of Crunkcore. Although disputed, it is thoroughly sourced. A comment has been added regarding the dispute, and therefore genre is not listed as a fusion in the infobox, but is only briefly mentioned here." Just because people say something is something else, does not make it that. To call those sources "thorough" is beyond questionable. Sgnaf (talk) 06:28, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre warring over Crunkcore 

message: I realize I'm somewhat new here, but please read the Wikipedia:reliable sources page. The number of spammy and unrelated websites with no notability or credibility is really disturbing. It's basically page vandalism if you ask me. I know this is a punk sub-genre so there will be zines and other DIY/amateur-created content which is absolutely reliable documentation, but most of this drivel just isn't. Sgnaf (talk) 06:38, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source reliability...