Talk:Crunkcore

Change Article Name

Isn't the genre actually called Crunkcore? I mean, that's what everyone else calls it. None of this "screamo-crunk" bullshit. --Lordnecronus (talk) 15:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

yes, the proper name of this subgenre is crunkcore sources: http://www.alterthepress.com/2009/03/feature-crunkcore-whats-dillio.html http://www.dobi.nu/yourscenesucks/crunk/index.htm http://www.myspace.com/brokencyde the fact that myspace ACTUALLY HAS A CRUNKCORE TAG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.236.142.19 (talk) 22:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

The purpose of Yourscenesucks is to parody underground music culture. PARODY. It should not be used as a reference at any point.Unmarked Person

Uh, yeah, Unmarked Person, I need to point out that Yourscenesucks was only one of the three sources that this guy added. Two sources are enough for factual evidence, right? Besides, who the fuck actually calls it Screamo-Crunk? The genre is almost always referred to as crunkcore.

The article would be better off if its name was changed to Crunkcore. I'm serious. --LordNecronus (talk) 00:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I moved it. You guys do realize you easily could've moved it yourselves. Why did you have to wait for the author (me) to move it? And to answer the person's comment two above me, Kerrang! magazine called it screamo-crunk, so a lot of people call it screamo-crunk, thank you very much.Krazycev 13 19:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Just for the record, not a single one of those sources pass WP:RS. Just saying :-) Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Removal of history section

What do you mean 'unnecessarily deleted'? It is full of speculation and does not have a single reference. To meet the standards of wikipedia, it should be deleted. I'm also considering putting this up for AFD due to the lack of coverage from reliable sources. -Reconsider the static (talk) 00:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but where would we put all our knowledge of crunkcore then? We can't just delete the article from the site. I agree on you with the history section (like you said, speculation), but the entire article? Crunkcore may be crap, but it's become famous enough to get its own article. And "lack of coverage from reliable sources"? --LordNecronus (talk) 20:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure it needs deleting, we just need to hunt down music magazines hating reviewing this monstrosity music. Surely bands like Brokencyde aren't serious?[1] Aren't they just musical trolls? Fences&Windows 21:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm. I could only find coverage of Brokencyde. Is this really more than a one-"band" genre? Fences&Windows 22:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

No, there are others. Unfortunately. But brokenCYDE's the most famous band in crunkcore, and it has this effect, which I will explain step-by-step:

1. Person finds out about crunkcore and decides to look for its signature band, brokenCYDE.
2. Person finds brokenCYDE, discovers that they're repulsively horrible.
3. Person vows never to listen to another crunkcore band again.

So, since the genre isn't too mainstream (it's just off from the mainstream), Person never hears another crunkcore band and we're left with him criticising the entire genre because he's heard one band. One terribly atrocious band. I've also heard another crunkcore band, Scene Kids (who are also terrible); there's also Hollywood Undead and 3OH!3, who may not strictly be crunkcore and aren't as bad as everyone says. So, in essence, yes. Crunkcore is identified by one band. One sole band that got famous. It's not even a good bandwagon to jump on, as brokenCYDE's the only crunkcore band anyone's ever heard of. All the others are too obscure. Nevertheless, we should try and find more info on other bands, as difficult as it may be. --LordNecronus (talk) 22:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Good explanation of the steps, they ring very true. After watching the Freaxx video, I'm never going near crunk, screamo or scrunk again. I did try looking for reliable sourcing discussing crunkcore/screamo-crunk, but all I could come up with was people who were horrified by Brokencyde. Kerrang! has covered it though, so perhaps other specialist music magazines will offer up some articles? Fences&Windows 23:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Please note that Lordnecronus is completely correct. Although brokeNCYDE is the most shitty famous band, Hollywood Undead were still probably the original crunkcore group. Da Kurlzz was frequently heard screaming in the background. brokeNCYDE decided to truly make crunkcore suck monkey cock define crunkcore, but Hollywood Undead truly was the start. The only reason brokeNCYDE is more famous, is because they actually include broken sounding noise guitars in their music. So please note that Hollywood Undead technically invented crunkcore. Then Breathe Carolina put a stronger emphasis on being a little bit heavy sounding when they screamed, and then brokeNCYDE decided to fuck up everything good about crunkcore make it the heaviest of any band when screaming.--Krazycev 13 18:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Screamo

I see no stylistic origins in screamo within any crunkcore bands. The screamed vocalizations are more closely related to metalcore or modern post-hardcore, so I am changing the opening to the article to "musical genre that combines crunk with post-hardcore." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.166.152.242 (talk) 01:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

We base our articles on reliable sources, not on the interpretations of our editors. Do you have reliable sources giving post-hardcore as an origin for crunkcore? Do you have sources stating that screamo isn't anything to do with screamocrunk? Fences&Windows 01:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Who gives a hoot about your so-called reliable sources? anyone could type anything in a blog as a review and it is deemed as a source. half the people from allmusicguide don't know what they're talking about (this is somewhat irrelevant, but im trying to prove a point). There just is no screamo aspects to these bands. And by the way, i actually like some of the bands, i'm just being accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.111.17 (talk) 20:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia gives a hoot about reliable sources. Please note that directly under where you make an edit the page states "...Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." Please, no one's opinion matters on this site. Wikipedia aims for accuracy, not biased opinions. Honestly, mister 68.36, actually read about the website before you start talking shit about other ESTABLISHED editors. --Krazycev 13 ^{other crap} 20:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

That is where you are wrong krazycev13. The sources that are deemed verifiable are merely opinions themselves, often written by people with no expertise on a genre. People who write articles in these "verifiable sources" make things sound good. It's their job. Even if what they are saying is incorrect, if it is acceptable in the public eye, then it is taken as law on this site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.111.17 (talk) 05:56, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

So then, 68.36, would you like to give me a reliable source? As of now, the genre isn't that popular, thus, there aren't really any reliable sources. Actually, are there ever reliable sources? They are ALL opinions, but some other opinions are more important than others'. Do you think that someone would compare the opinion of Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen from some ex-murderer fresh off of parole to the opinion of Roger Ebert? No. So the opinion of editors are not important, and The Guardian is a very popular newspaper with established writers writing for it. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV 13 ^{other crap} 01:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I have never heard of The Guardian. I'm not saying it isn't good, I just haven't heard of it. I don't agree with "some other opinions are more important than others'". You should watch how you word things. I understand what you mean. I also like the allusion you used. I guess ultimately it is one of the flaws of wikipedia. The most reliable that I can suggest is maybe from someone who knows about the distinct differences of screamo and post-hardcore, etc. Like if the ex-murderer guy knew more of the action/sci-fi genre that Ebert did, I would listen to him more than Ebert. We need sources from even more specific spaces. I suggest an editor/writer from an underground fanzine. I personnally don't know any, but i think something like that would work well for the specifics of this article and other "screamo"-related articles in general.

A decent source!

I hit the motherlode:[2]. A reliable source all about scrunk, complete with critical reception, discussion and history. Fences&Windows 02:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Just... wow. I can't believe someone actually managed to find a decent source. It seems too good to be true... which is tempting fate, but who cares? --LordNecronus (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Fences. I've been trying to find a good source since I made this article. I appreciate both of your help, guys.--Krazycev 13 18:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Article name

Not a single source in the article uses the term "crunkcore", so I am confused as to why it is being used for the article title. The two best sources here (The Guardian and the Boston Phoenix) both use "scrunk", so I suggest a move to that, in the absence of anything(!) calling this genre "crunkcore" (Allmusic mentions "crunk-punk", but its use of apostrophes indicates it is no using it in a manner that justifies a legitimate genre). Myspace, as ever, must never be used for anything :-) Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The list of bands

Whatever you do, do NOT, and I repeat NOT, remove Breathe Carolina, 3OH!3 (frequently deleted), Hollywood Undead (also deleted alot), I Set My Friends On Fire, or brokeNCYDE. Don't add bands unless you have citations. Thank you.--Krazycev 13 ^{other crap} 19:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

But there aren't citations for them from reliable sources at the minute! I've just had to remove Urban Dictionary, for heaven's sake! Blackmetalbaz (talk) 16:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Then we need to try and find some reliable sources.--Krazycev 13 ^{other crap} 18:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I whole-heartedly agree! I suggest we start by removing those for which we don't have a reference and replace them when and if such reliable sources come to light. After all, it would be doing it ass-bacwards to decid that certain bands fit the description and then go out and find sources... it shoud be the other way round. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:02, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe that's what happened. I'll try to find a good source. One band that isn't a problem is brokeNCYDE, considering several reviewers and websites say that they are crunkcore. Other than that, it might be a slight problem. I'll work on finding some good sources now. I'm guessing yourscenesucks.com and alterthepress.com don't count? Right?--Krazycev 13 ^{other crap} 19:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

You are correct that webzines like that do not pass WP:RS. I have sourced the ones I could, and removed the others. One minor thin... it ust be typeset "Brokencyde" per WP:MOS; this is the same as not using a backwards "R" in Korn etc. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:40, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how 3oh!3 or Hollywood Undead can be included in this genre. 3oh!3 has no hardcore aspects, and Hollywood Undead is merely rap metal, they aren't crunk at all. rapping and screaming at the same time doesnt automatically make crunkcore. otherwise loads of nu-metal bands from the 90's would be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.111.17 (talk) 20:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

If reliable sources say a band is crunkcore/scrunk/screamo-crunk, then they are as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Musical genres are always going to be squabbled over by fans, but these disputes aren't relevant for editing Wikipedia. Fences&Windows 21:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The Family Force Five "source" you guys have links to a review on a Chimaira album. You guys fail. Also, all "reliable sources" are once again the opinion of a single individual, only it's published. Face the facts that the "scr" in scrunk and the "core" in crunkcore references that their is screaming in the music. bands you've listed such as 3OH!3, The Millionaires, and Family Force Five lack screaming vocals. So whether the "reliable source" states them as crunkcore or not, that doesn't make it so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.155.61.44 (talk) 03:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Family Force 5 does scream, but you are completely correct on the rest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.111.17 (talk) 23:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The link has been updated. I think you might have stumbled upon one of the core pillars of Wikipedia: that something is verifiable, doesn't mean it's true. dissolve^talk 06:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The link goes to the allmusic front page. once again. fail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.20.244.82 (talk) 15:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Did you know that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit? dissolve^talk 16:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus.  Skomorokh, barbarian  19:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

---

Crunkcore → Scrunk — Not a single reliable source uses the term "crunkcore", whereas two major ones (The Guardian and The Boston Phoenix) use "scrunk". All that has been offered in defence of "crunkcore" is Urban Dictionary and similar. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:36, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Strong Support per your exact reason. I had to move the page awhile ago from screamo-crunk to crunkcore, but it really should be scrunk.--Krazycev 13 ^{other crap} 19:02, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Oppose. I thought you were right, but clearly crunkcore is the most common name. I think this name should be kept. --Krazycev 13 ^{other crap} 20:52, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Yeah, wouldn't a proper discussion be better than doing a survey? Wikipedia isn't a democracy.

Also, while I haven't found any so-called "reliable sources" (how the fuck am I supposed to know what's reliable and what's not?), I decided to use a tactic that has been used before on this very wiki (check here; it might be in the archives). What's this tactic, you may ask? Checking Google for results. I took the three main names - "crunkcore", "scrunk" and "screamo-crunk" - and searched them on Google to see how many results I got. "Crunkcore" had 60,300 results, "screamo-crunk" had 29,400 results, and "scrunk" had 47,000 results. So it's fairly obvious that "crunkcore" is the most popular name for the genre, and therefore the name we should use for the article. --LordNecronus (talk) 02:07, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The outcome of this discussion is not based either on !votes or on Gogle hits. How the hell do you know what is reliable? I suggest reading WP:RS for a start. A good ballpark is: has the content been commercially published by a third party? The number of Google hits is irrelevant, as the quality of the source is paramount. So far, not a single reliable source for "crunkcore" has been presented, so not only is a move required, but the term "crunkcore" should probably be removed entirely. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 06:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

mtv.com uses 'crunkcore' here, also see the Ottawa Citizen. Another measure of use is blog hits. Crunkcore=4264; Screamo-Crunk = 121; Scrunk=92. I favour crunkcore, as I think it has the widest usage. Fences&Windows 01:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Given that Revolver used "screamo-crunk"[3], and an article in Echo used "crunk core"[4], I don't see a clear consensus yet among reliable sources for "scrunk". Given Wikipedia's use the most common English-language name policy, I agree that Search engine testing can be useful in determining what the most common name is, which crunkcore seems to be according to LordNecronus and Fences & Windows's comments. If scrunk emerges as the most common name, the article can be moved then. dissolve^talk 03:00, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"-core"?

I don't think crunkcore is an accurate term for the genre as there aren't any hardcore aspects to the genre. Many of the bands merely use nu-metal-like guitars (if they even use guitars), and screaming has nothing to do with hardcore music. I do think scrunk is acceptable. Screamo crunk is inaccurate too as there are no screamo aspects either. And i fail to see punk aspects in most of the bands (i find a little in FF5) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.111.17 (talk) 20:55, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Yet again, personal opinion does not matter on Wikipedia. We judge our articles on reliable sources, not biased or personal opinions of our editors. We have reliable sources, they state it as crunkcore, thats the end of it. --Krazycev 13 ^{other crap} 20:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

We don't do personal analysis and opinion on Wikipedia. If reliable sources say that crunkcore=scrunk=screamo-crunk=a mix of screamo and crunk, then that's we way say too. Wrangling about the minutiae of band genres will never get us anywhere. Fences&Windows 21:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thats why i didnt do anything about it. i just stated my opinion on the talk section to see who else agreed so we could make progress on the article. no reason to be a dick about it. seriously though, there is no screamo or hardcore aspects to the genre other than screaming. and if you really think about it, a reliable source is a matter of opinion. like allmusicguide. thats listed as a reliable source, but it isnt. i have ready many articles about metalcore and post-hardcore bands, saying they are screamo, but they actually arent. the guy (as there were many articles all written by the same person) also said that melodic hardcore, post-hardcore, and screamo were all the same genre, but in reality, they are each different genres. i dont want to argue, im just saying that i think wikipedia may be becoming too based on reviews. afterall, most reviews are opinions.

I don't know that anyone is being a dick. Wikipedia editors assume people are trying to help the project, not hurt it. I agree that opinions should not be stated as fact in an article, which is why we have a policy to maintain a neutral point of view. For example, a statement such as "Family Force 5 is a crunkcore band", could be re-phrased as "Allmusic noted that Family Force 5 and similar bands in the Atlanta, Georgia-region gained notice for their "crunk-rock sound", leading them to sign with Maverick Records and release their debut album, Business Up Front/Party in the Back, in 2006." in order to maintain a more neutral point of view. This article is currently a stub, which means there's lots of room for improvement. dissolve^talk 21:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with OP in that Crunkcore has absolutely nothing to do with screamo. Screamo is a very, very specific style of emo, and both of these genres incorporate the exact same screaming methods, and share these with post-hardcore, metalcore, grindcore, and some traditional hardcore punk. Other than screaming, Crunkcore has nothing in common with screamo. The typical lyrics are different, the aesthetic and tone are different, the production is different, and hell. It doesn't even require guitars, drums, bass, or any other traditional instruments which are pretty much necessary in order for anything to be screamo (or almost any other genre of post-hardcore or rock). What's more, I'm more than willing to assume that it takes zero influence from first wave screamo at all. I can't begin to comprehend The Millionaires crowded around a Saetia album looking for inspiration. In fact, I'd be surprised if any of these crunkcore groups even took influence from any of the more established members of the ever debated "second wave" of screamo. At a stretch, I can see these groups taking influence from Bullet For My Valentine or Alesana (though the latter is apparently classified as "screamo" on Wiki now). Input welcome. (Albert Mond (talk) 09:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC))

Man i am glad someone agreed with me about this and actually knows stuff about music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.111.17 (talk) 21:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Albert, I completely agree as well. Bands such as I Set My Friends On Fire fit the description of crunkcore perfectly, and yet, they can not be added to the article. Please don't take this as sarcasm, but do you know why that is? We only use reliable sources and I have not found any stating that ISMFOF is, in fact, crunkcore. Breathe Carolina and Hollywood Undead also contain screams and guitar work (also drumming on Hollywood Undead), and I'd say that they fit the criteria. But, yet again, they cannot be adding due to a lack of sources. If you find [reliable] sources stating more fitting bands like ISMFOF, BC, and HU meet the criteria of crunkcore/screamo crunk/scrunk/screamo and crunk, they can be added. But only then. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV 13 ^{other crap} 20:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Straight.com mentions "throat-shredding screamo vocals" and "skinny rocker boys doing crunk", and their cover of Soulja Boy Tell 'Em’s crunk hit "Crank That (Soulja Boy)” on You Can’t Spell Slaughter Without Laughter.[5] I Set My Friends On Fire, Breathe Carolina, Hollywood Undead and Millionaires are included as "screamo-crunk" in the Revolver article I linked earlier.[6] dissolve^talk 20:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd say Revolver is reliable enough. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV 13 ^{other crap} 17:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)