Talk:DIY ethic

message: This article reads like a plug for a lot of things. 
That isn't to say that BTM! is bad, to the contrary, hats off to them. 
But listing every DIY band/project/movement is either in OR out of scope, but to list only a handful and call that "DIY" is unrepresentative, to say the least.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.174.21.5 (talk) 17:59, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial plug for BTM! among others 

message: Please don't name a specific program, especially since that program is non-free software.Sunnan 19:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial plug for Apple 

message: For example, doing your taxes yourself is DIY, but nothing about it is Punk.
-- Aye, but your standard Punk WILL identify with the DIY ethic.  Therefore, it is worth linking and/or mentioning in some capacity.
Yeah, a lot more people than punks and indies subscribe to this particular ethic, I think that it's worth noting this.
I can't agree more - I think the age bias of Wikipedians is showing here.  The DIY ethic was (and to some extent remains) very strong in people who grew up during the Great Depression and WW2 eras.  My 85 year old father is anything but "punk", but he does everything he can himself.  The "point and write checks" atitude toward getting things done is a product of the Baby Boomers.  Before that, DIY was the norm, not some new trend.63.161.86.254 (talk) 18:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DIY != Punk 

message: It seems that neither this article nor the DIY culture article accurately represent the general DIY culture.  At least in America (i'm sure that it's this way most everywhere though), there have always been people creating things themselves. They did so for different reasons: 
•to solve a common problem (inventers) 
•to make something more personalized, more functional, or attract attention (modding)
•to avoid paying a price seen as too high 
•for self-improvement and/or learning purposes
•an outlet for creativity
•boredom
The list goes on. Though it seems that only recently the practice of doing something yourself that you would usually have others do for you (or not do at all) has become a named action and that the people who regularly do or make things themselves have come together and formed a community. This phenomenon might be a result of easier and more widespread communication due to the internet and/or because of the increase in standardization and  (possible as a result of fear of lawsuits) an appearant lack of trust in the competency of most consumers by corperations and manufacturers.
--Mirabile Dictu 20:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  unrepresentative 

message: it appears that an article already exists wich covers almost exactly what i am talking about: DIY.  Since that article is more generalized and complete, i suggest that we merge both DIY ethic and DIY culture with DIY, or at least do some mentioning/linking in between all of them. --Mirabile Dictu 20:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with DIY 

message: I can't believe there hasn't been ONE mention of GNU/Linux or any of the *BSD variants.  Free/Open Source Software should be at the TOP of any polemic about Do It Yourself culture/ethic.
well there is now a link...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.66.159.54 (talk) 05:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Examples 

message: Part of the reason this article is bad is because it doesn't seem to properly explain (or understand if you will) the distinction between the DIY Punk/Music subculture and some vague nebulous notion of "DIY Ethic" in the abstract. These things are related obviously but are not the same, and one is a coherently defined and sustained subculture that seems worthy of being a subject of it's own. The label of "DIY Punk" and discussion of the "DIY music scene" at the national (and world-wide) level are part of a well-defined subculture that combines a general DIY ethic with specific manifestations such as independent record labels, punk or "indie" bands who generally manage their own tours and releases (relative to their level of notoriety, i.e. Plan-it-X records choosing to only charge $5 for CDs and distribute through mail order despite ample opportunity to do otherwise), distribution of zines or other small press materials, and house shows/house venues. The subculture also has unique and identifiable aesthetics typically borrowed from the older DIY/anarchist punk tradition, 60s radical culture, leftist/anti-capitalist politics, emphasis on self-improvement/positive thinking etc. etc.
It seems wrong and confusing to try to meld this with some general notion of DIY ethic in the abstract. Obviously someone learning to do home improvements or fix their car for themselves can be said to be doing so with the same general "ethic" in mind of a band putting out their own CDs, or choosing to tour only at house venues, but one of these things is part of a wide-spread and well defined subculture and the other is not. There is a wealth of press coverage, printed/online materials and personal discussion of the "DIY music scene" but most people who choose to do repairs on their homes themselves to save money don't identify as part of a particular scene or subculture. I'll leave it up to the Wikipedia community whether or not this subculture passes notoriety standards but as an outsider (sorry I don't know how to do all  the mark-up) and someone who considers themselves knowledgeable of the subculture this article seems to be mentioning in passing, this article seems muddled and poorly-researched. Those are just my two cents though, thanks for reading.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.82.233 (talk) 03:16, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there is a particular subculture within punk music which is a distinct entity not particularly closely affiliated to any broader sense of "do it yourself". The problem is that nobody with close knowledge of that subject has come along to write an article which follows Wikipedia's standards for content presentation and sourcing. Instead we get essays drawn from personal recollection and gradually expanded by well-meaning editors with disparate examples. The approach of content generation by simply throwing material out there and hoping for some of it to stick has failed in this area for several years; the only way that's proven to work is to start small and to de-merge when there is sufficient well-written and well-sourced material to warrant a new article. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music distinction 

message: I found indie design while searching for something else, and it doesn't seem strong enough to stand on its own as an article. Searching for the phrase, it's usually only mentioned in passing, like in this 2008 NYT article; not many sources discuss "indie design" or "indie designers" in depth - I've only found  this 2010 WSJ article and this 2011 Dwell post so far. Should it fit somewhere into this article instead? Or into a different article? Dreamyshade (talk) 07:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Indie design]]? 

message: I read the article and didn't know what "travellers" were. It appeared in two places, once the link went to a piece on "tourism", that didn't seem to fit. The second time the link went to "Irish travellers" , possible, but not sure. Since the "traveller" appears next to "rave", maybe what was intended was more like 'new age traveller' somebody want to look into this? Areader2 (talk) 18:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  links to  the word "traveller" 

message: I am sure that DIY activities of music (self-production, self-distribution, self-promotion, and the whole network around such activities) can date back to much earlier times than the 70s, and does not limit to just punk. However, the fact that DIY music became a dedicated term and is so strongly tied up with 70s' punk movement is interesting and led me into thinking why. My guess is that punk did not create a DIY mode for music, but took it as a symbol, a core value, a flag, and that's why the two have been so widely connected since. But, I'm not an expert and these are just my speculations without direct evidence. I'd love to hear what other people who knows more about it thinks.
Also, it is necessary to point out the similarities and distinctions between DIY and indie. If DIY is more tied up with punk in the 70s, indie feels like a term to me that can be used on undefined or multiple genres, and appeared only after the 80s. Of course there is a spirit that they both share - independency. Again, looking forward to people with more expertise in this subject.
50.179.176.17 (talk) 16:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that DIY music has always existed. It could only be said, maybe, that in the '70s, the music industry discovered that punk bands could reach the same level of popularity and success as a pop singer. Thus giving the impression of a DIY "movement".--Ilovetopaint (talk) 03:28, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  DIY Music Origin is 70s Punk? 

message: Hello, I am new to Wikipedia and am editing this page as part of a WikiEdu project.
From analyzing the content on this page, a large portion of it appears to be dedicated to Punk Culture. It seems to be marking a time before Maker Culture and paying homage to Punks. If this is so, then some of this information may need to be placed in different articles.
If anyone has any suggestions or comments on how to make this article cohesive I will be working on edits in this sandbox here Lostxxjustina (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I edited the page with punk aesthetic and culture in mind since that's where most of the information was leading the reader. I added a punk music subsection so that others can follow in it's place. I also removed the US section of the Worldwide heading because that information didn't belong there. I moved it to this sandbox to be placed in other maker culture article that may be better suited. Lostxxjustina (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving Forward 

message: I am proposing that this article be merged into both Maker culture and Punk subculture to have the best placement of information. I think that both articles are a decent size and are able to insert the information that is in the DIY Ethic article. As the page is laid out, it seems as if this information isn’t so much linked to the philosophy behind DIY Ethic, so much as to what happened during this punk era of the 70’s. A lot of this information seems to be outdated and sections can be moved and transitioned into Maker culture and Punk subculture. There seems to be a shift in what constitutes as DIY Ethic and the punk ideology attached to it into what most DIY creators work on now. These new creations are mostly technological and improving older inventions and traditional arts and crafts. The section is am proposing to move into Maker culture is the Worldwide section which would be beneficial as to give a short history into how we as a society have reached this Maker culture that surrounds technology, especially since the article doesn’t have a history section. The Internet subsection would be the most beneficial because it covers the emergence of the Internet and the effect it’s had on creators. The sections that I am proposing to be blended into Punk subculture are Punk culture, music, and skateboarding and bicycling. I think that information is best suited here because there are already sections that already existing. For instance, Riot Grrrl, is talked about in both pages. It seems like the DIY Ethic information is trying to be about the mindset, but is essentially repeating what the Punk Subculture page is already saying. Lostxxjustina (talk) 14:50, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: should be placed on the article pages, not on talk pages. There can only be one primary topic; it's impossible to redirect this article to both Maker culture and Punk subculture. This proposal in a way implies that this is a somewhat ambiguous (amorphous) topic, which should discuss its relation to both of the other topics. Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia gives guidance on copying this content to other articles; it's OK to copy relevant content to both of the other articles (and that content can stay here as well). – wbm1058 (talk) 01:14, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger Proposal