Talk:Is This Band Emo?

Latest comment: 3 months ago by PrimalMustelid in topic Did you know nomination

Notability of Is This Band Emo?


The site has received ample coverage from music publications such as Alternative Press, Rolling Stone, Consequence and The Ringer, so I went bold and created it. I may create a Washed Up Emo article later if time permits. Also, *insert real emo copypasta here*. PantheonRadiance (talk) 06:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

The website is definitely notable with the sources provided. I did some cleanup on the article but it looks good.
Washed Up Emo definitely needs a page in my opinion, but I don't know if there's good sources for it. There's some interviews with Tom Mullen from American Songwriter and No Echo, but I couldn't find a source that wasn't primary or a press release. This site seem to get more press coverage than washed up emo. 49p (talk) 02:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
49p Oh wow, thank you so much! Great to see you also added the logo too. I appreciate it :)
Also I did find a Paste source I was going to save for the Washed Up Emo page. It has some primary statements but good secondary commentary as well; I'm adding it to this page. PantheonRadiance (talk) 23:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 11:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Created by PantheonRadiance (talk). Self-nominated at 01:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Is This Band Emo?; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: None required.

Overall:   Article created on 7 February, and meets the length requirement. All sources are, as far as I can tell, reliable for the material they are cited for. Earwig reveals no copyvio, and I didn't spot any instances of unacceptably WP:Close paraphrasing. The hook is properly cited and seems interesting enough. This is the nominator's fifth DYK nomination (after Template:Did you know nominations/Maximilian Dood, Template:Did you know nominations/Etika, Template:Did you know nominations/The Impossible Quiz, and Template:Did you know nominations/The Creative Gene), so they are QPQ exempt. Some comments on the content:

  • The "Origins" section relies almost entirely on an interview with Mullen. See WP:PRIMARY.
    • The Ringer interview does also contain secondary commentary and I tried to incorporate material from both. That being said, I was going to save this Paste source for the Washed Up Emo article, but it kills multiple birds with one stone, from the Wikivoice to primary to verification.
  • in response to its increasing mainstream prevalence – I'm not sure I get this from the cited source?
    • Paste source touches upon it with better context and explanation.
  • Mullen lamented the misunderstood notions of the genre – whether or not it is misunderstood is a matter of opinion, and as such should not be presented in WP:WikiVoice.
    • Rewrote to "what he perceived as the shifting legacy of the genre" per Paste/Ringer.
  • noting how the mainstream press often associated the genre solely with bands such as My Chemical Romance and Fall Out Boy, alongside the culture's aesthetics – I'm not sure I get this from the cited source?
    • That was from the source's third paragraph, starting from "Mullen…" to "phase for some." I rephrased it to clarify that the mainstream press associated the genre primarily with its popularity and aesthetics in the 2000s, while overlooking the genre's hardcore punk origins and Midwest developments.
  • spent several months including bands with interspersed jokes on the site – odd phrasing.
    • Meant to convey Mullen added jokes about various bands. Took out interspersed.
  • Bands listed as emo on the site include [...] – any particular reason to list them in this specific order? Alphabetical would seem most intuitive to me.
    • I was trying to go partially chronologically from first wave to second to third, but forgot to switch Jawbreaker. Rearranged alphabetically.
  • I didn't spot Rites of Spring mentioned on any of the cited sources as listed on the website to be an emo band. Did I miss it?
  • despite their long-term association with the genre – neither cited source makes this point.
    • Rewrote to "despite their association with the Third Wave of the genre" via Ringer source (although I'd argue that it's somewhat of a "sky's blue" instance).
      • It's not so much whether it's correct as whether we're making points that the sources at most hint at. I think this is probably okay considering the April Fools/"Why prod the Third-Wave fans and bands, like Fall Out Boy?" and "Third-Wave bands like the Used or MCR, which are typically considered emo, are listed as not emo." parts of the interview. TompaDompa (talk) 09:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ping PantheonRadiance. TompaDompa (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think that's everything, so are we good to go? PantheonRadiance (talk) 00:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Yes. TompaDompa (talk) 09:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)Reply