Talk:Cursive (band)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Post-hardcore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of post-hardcore and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Post-hardcoreWikipedia:WikiProject Post-hardcoreTemplate:WikiProject Post-hardcorePost-hardcore
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Genre

Cursive's latest release has been labeled "post-emo" by pitchfork media. However, I haven't been able to find much correlating material. Worthy of being in the article? --Tanner 13:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think at this point that seems like a ridiculous genre, unless one can describe what "post-emo" is (and I doubt Pitchfork Media is qualified). Their newest release is pretty much straight up rock or punk, with some minor mixing of other genres, like soul, swing, jazz, or emo. — littletinyfish 2006-08-26 16:27

Agree. People are calling anything that isn't bound by conventional genres "post-whatever it sound similar to".

There is nothing "emo" about this band. They're simply alternative.

I dunno. If you read up on emo you might find Cursive fits all too well. That being said, I think the definition of "emo" has spread so that it could encapsulate just about any band. My favorite part in the article:

“

The classification of bands as "emo" is often controversial. Fans of several of the listed bands have recoiled at the use of the "emo" tag, and have gone to great lengths to explain why they don't qualify as "emo". In many cases, the term has simply been attached to them because of musical similarites, a common fashion sense, or because of the band's popularity within the "emo" scene, not because the band adheres to emo as a music genre.

”

Little tinyfish 18:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Better Update

Cursive seems like a pretty big band to have such a lousy Wikipedia entry. I'm attempting to make it a little bit more respectable, but some more help would be nice. Specifically I don't have much information on their pre-Domestica years.

Well done on trying to improve this article, but I'm not sure that your changes are actually an improvement. Sentences like "It was written like a one-act play documenting the lies, hate and deceit associated with a divorce" and "With this album the Kasher turned away from attacking himself and began attacking bad politics, empty suburban lives, and religious hypocrisy" betray a POV, and are more suited to a review than an enclyclopedia entry. And you need to cite references for all the assertions, from Rolling Stone reviews to Saddle Creek anouncements etc.Wastekiller 10:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. I'm still a little new at this and still trying to understand the finer points.— littletinyfish 2006-08-26 16:27

I think someone is leaving out their Eight Teeth to Eat You With EP, also.

Garbage

Aside from the discography this article is terrible. Nothing is cited and it reads like a fan's interpretation. Accuracy is pretty poor as well. Shortly after going on hiatus saddle creek announced the new record? Only if you count two years as shortly.