Talk:Electropunk

Content

The contents of this page so far are approved by Scott Ryser, from The Units, one of the main synthpunk-classified bands in the article, with whom I'm in personal contact.

-It's not written like a Wikipedia article though. "Clash suck"? Thanks, internet encyclopedia!

(the above quote is probably in reference to the semi-vandalized (made hugely subjective) version of the entry from Oct 18th by "Lahmond") -djbrokenwindow Nov 19, 2007

I overhauled the page and added copious references as the entry was set to be deleted (tomorrow!) for not having citations. If you look at the French Wikipedia page for synthpunk, you'll see an entirely different, and far more accepting acknowledgement of this genre name. It is ironic that their page doesn't mention the Metal Boys (and their later project Dr Mix And The Remix) who were straight up synthpunk.

A genre? How do I cite such a thing when it emerged as a retroactive identifier ONLINE first? You can find it used on countless music web sites (ebay used, but lots of new pages). It has a pretty specific range of characteristics across all the music described on the SYNTHPUNK Yahoogroups forum. If you search '"synthpunk genre"' in google, you get lots of hits. "Synth-punk" pulls up 18 in-print-on-paper articles in Washington Post and The Oregonian newspapers between 2004 and 2007(yesterday no less!)

It really annoys me that Wikipedia has such a blind disregard for decent online sources, but will accept printed-on-paper articles written by some inaccurate part time newspaper journo who may VERY LIKELY have been made aware of it ONLINE first. -djbrokenwindow 111907 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djbrokenwindow (talk •contribs) 04:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Did some more fixes, typos, and added missing ref's, as well as tackled difficult issue of 'techno-punk' naming in 1978 vs this retro-active genre name, and why "Techno" doesn't mean now what it used to and thus gives purpose to a seperate signifier, aka "synth"punk

Put the 'techno-punk' ref source details in The Screamers article since i was dealing with it for this article.

Gave the techno article discussion some grief about not addressing the 'techno-' prefix vs the segue into a genre name, as related in my research here. 71.193.207.242 (talk) 21:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

undid a link to an advertisement for a band called the Magnificents, whose ad said it was quoting NME (and using the word synth-punk) If it is a source from "NME, Issue #, page #", not just a secondard quote of the review on an ad somewhere. that is like quoting an ad that says "this once source says" without any detail to back it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djbrokenwindow (talk • contribs) 02:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Quasi Academic BS

So supposedly some guy in 1999 came up with this term? NONSENSE! Anyone else tired of these quick to write dweebs that write stuff like this? Go write for a fri*ging*** newspaper if you need to.***** ELECTROPUNK was floating around even in the early 80's when when I was a teeny bopper. It was sort of associated with Electro which was more main mainstreamish and mixed with funk and was more danceable. If it needs to be termed and teamed with an originator then it's a tie between rock gods(now) Joy Division/Martin Hannett and Gary Numan/Tubway army —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.172.26 (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

---

More reasons why it's BS....why does everyone forget fri**en Alien Sex Fiend —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.178.19 (talk) 17:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC) as i recall, the term "synthpunk" (or "synth-punk") was often used in ira robbins' "trouser press" magazine during the late seventies and eighties. if one wants to learn how the term was used and what the genre entails, that might be the best place to start. "trouser press" is one of the best sources for information on the development of punk and early alternative pop/rock. (there is an online version of robbins' "trouser press record guide," a reference source that was once published as a series of books. i'm sure one would find many references to "synthpunk" in that resource.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.127.228.117 (talk) 03:35, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

{In haste: Just passin' on my way to the 'pub'} I saw BBC Four's Synth Britannia YouTube, again this morning, and recall the term readily used, vis the late-70s/early-80s Sheffield scene. Back then (an still), I was intensely interested and, at least in London, the term for post-Cabs yet non-pop dancey stuffs (peaking around 84-85, roughly in Mark Brydon's orbit), was big beat. (Later, think, The Cure's "Hot Hot Hot!!!".) –DjScrawl (talk) 13:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Having said that, and although it does seem a bit of a retrospective re-brand, the broader/umberella 'synthpunk' term does seem useful, as an analogue (puns at no extra charge) of 'electropunk', which I equate more with proto-electroclash, and thereafter. Esp' since 'big beat's been convincingly appropriated by messers Norman Cook, et al. –DjScrawl (talk) 13:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 20 April 2015

Synthpunk → Electropunk – The opening line says "Synthpunk (best known as electropunk)". Doesn't that suggest that the more common name is in fact electropunk and that that should be the title? Also, Google results return 207,000 results for "synthpunk" and 437,000 for "electropunk" Unreal7 (talk) 18:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Support The ratio in books is almost as extreme. Thanks to the nom. In all good ways this made me laugh GregKaye 19:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Support as per User:GregKaye. Commonality, as usefully and reliably demonstrated by our ingenious collators at Google. Pandeist (talk) 05:14, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Support The ratio seems convincing for WP:COMMONNAME.--SabreBD (talk) 06:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)