Talk:Crunkcore/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Request for comment on Kesha

Okay, the page has gone under semi-protect again, and I was advised for request for comment. Basically, should the wording of Kesha's inclusion in the article be more vague, because some editors think that the original source is vague.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:46, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Let's make this a lot easier: what is the comment from the source, and what is the statement in the article that people are wanting to add? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 14:43, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

This is the quote from the source: "Either way, “My First Kiss” is the zenith with a hook that incorporates kissing noises along with some come-on’s from crunkcore queen/special guest Kesha." These are two versions of the article statement that has been batted around: "Kesha was labeled "crunkcore queen" by one writer and was noted for her guest spot on the 3OH!3 album Streets of Gold", and "Allmusic has associated Kesha with the genre by referring to her as the 'crunkcore queen.'".--¿3family6 _contribs 21:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

It would seem clear to me that the second version more explicitly refers to the source; the first version makes it seem that Kesha is 'generally' known as crunk royalty.

An even better version of the second statement might read as follows:

• "Allmusic.com's David Jeffries, while writing his review of the 3OH!3 album, Streets of Gold, refers to Kesha as the 'crunkcore queen.'" (insert citation here).

A bit wordy, but its better to be concise than deductive. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:26, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe this?: "Also, Allmusic has referred to Kesha as the 'crunkcore queen' in her guest spot on the 3OH!3 album Streets of Gold."--¿3family6 _contribs 12:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The problem with that is that it isn't all of AllMusic that is calling Kesha that; it's just a writer for the online source. We do need to be precise when attributing anything to a BLP.

As well, Jeffries didn't call her the crunkcore queen in the album; he praised her performance by calling her the c.q. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 01:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I would argue that as Jeffries is writing in his capacity as a reviewer for the site and not on a blog (Allmusic does publish personal blogs), he is representative of the site and therefore is the site. But I'll concede that point. I think a tweaked version of the second option you gave would be best: "Also, David Jeffries of Allmusic referred to Kesha as the 'crunkcore queen' when noting her guest spot on the 3OH!3 album, Streets of Gold."--¿3family6 _contribs 12:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Are others okay with this version? -Jack Sebastian (talk) 03:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like a decent elaboration on the source. Jonjonjohny (talk) 11:24, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. Rich Farmbrough, 22:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC).

You may as well also say that Paul Lester of the Guardian described Family Force 5 as the missing link between busted and limp bizkit. Eitheruse the source or don't but the way its worded at the moment, its pointless having in the article. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 00:54, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Then maybe we should remove it entirely. But your analogy above has absolutely nothing to do with crunkcore.--¿3family6 _contribs 17:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

My analogy is that the way it is written is clunky, and heavily implies she isn't crunkcore anyway so why bother. But it is realibly sourced and therefore can be included on that basis. The way it is written also implies all music is not reliable and is potentially insulting to david jenkins as it seems to imply he is not qualified to write about music. I really cannot understand why this one source is so insulting to many. Linkin Park are much more commercial than, say, Hed PE, but both can still comfortably be labelled nu-metal Syxxpackid420 (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

The problem with the source is it doesn't say straight out "Kesha is crunkcore." If it did, there would be much less debate. The way that the source is worded, it is unclear exactly what the author means. And this is not just me saying this, I was keeping the article without what you call "weasel words," but outside editors recommended that I ask for an RfC. And the RfC found that the wording should specify that it was David Jeffries calling Kesha the "crunkcore queen".--¿3family6 _contribs 12:01, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

That family force 5 article uses wiki as a source, this is a spiderweb of logic creating feedback which makes the source unreliable. I have therefore adjusted the text wiki cannot be a source for wiki. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 00:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Where is the evidence of that? Oh, never mind, I found it. If that is indeed why the article calls them crunkcore, they should be completely removed from this list.--¿3family6 _contribs 01:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok i can see new references have been found. Also the ref for Blood on the dance floor does not cite screamo-crunk but screamo/glam/crunk. I'm not a genre warrior (a band cited as both must therefore be crunkcore imo) but just don't want this article to attract them. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 03:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Good fact-checking. Go ahead and take that reference out. With Kesha, why did you take out the reference to David Jeffries? If you look above, that info was considered key to the new wording.--¿3family6 _contribs 13:37, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Is it not slanderous against him, it suggests Allmusic is reliable except for David Jeffries. Go ahead and edit if not, i just found the writing clunky 86.168.134.121 (talk) 17:00, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh wow, I would never have seen it that way. So I guess the reference to John McDonnell should be removed as well? And maybe while we're at it we can remove from the entire English Wikipedia any mention of an author when they are mentioned alongside the work being quoted? Seriously, specifying the author along with the work is a common practice on the English Wiki, as it helps identify that the information is by that particular author in a particular work.--¿3family6 _contribs 19:09, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Well there's a reliable source that isn't considered reliable enough by some editors, so i'll have to give up more than anything even though i know i'm right Syxxpackid420 (talk) 23:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Most of the editors here do think Allmusic is reliable, what is in question is the clarity and strength of the statement.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:02, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

This going on again? If a source that is deemed reliable calls Kesha a crunkcore artist then its sourced and unless there are reliable sources that say she isn't case closed, let it rest. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:35, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

What happened was that an editor kept trying to change the wording, and the page got semi-protected. I was requested by the protecting editor to try and resolve the dispute. I called an RfC, and the responding editor said that the wording in the Allmusic source was vague, and so the wording should be changed to reflect that. Myself and that editor came up with a new statement, and two other editors agreed on the new wording. However, User:Syxxpackid420 thinks that the source is strong enough that no special wording is needed. Personally, I don't know what to do anymore, as this issue keeps coming up, and whenever I try to enforce the consensus, someone comes in with the opposite view. I don't want to be heavy handed and end up with the page locked down, but this discussion just does not go away.--¿3family6 _contribs 04:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

was just trying to respond myself with a similiar answer, i guess you must be frustrated by this article by now. I realise consensus can change i don;t really know what a RfC is, I presume some kind of conflict resolution. Either way, I will not attempt to edit the article now, as these editors that disagree are the type of people that think slipknot aren;t metal. Convincing them kesha is crunkcore would be just as hard ie impossible Syxxpackid420 (talk) 04:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is a form of conflict resolution. I'll try it again and see what happens. I just want something definite to end this whole thing.--¿3family6 _contribs 04:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

RfC revisited

I'm putting this up for RfC again because debate has flared up about the last one. It might be my fault, I removed the template myself last time, because I was new to this whole thing, and didn't realize that someone else other than the requestor has to do that. But anyway, the whole debacle that has gone on for over a year now is about the following statement from Allmusic: "Either way, “My First Kiss” is the zenith with a hook that incorporates kissing noises along with some come-on’s from crunkcore queen/special guest Kesha."Here is the link. Basically, is this enough to say that Kesha is crunkcore, or does a more specific wording have to be done?--¿3family6 _contribs 04:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I think this discussion should be threaded and with word preceding comment (!vote), this is going to help the discussion to reach or not a consensus, but we should also notice that a statement should not rely in a single source, if the fact is not sustained elsewhere, then it is only a single voice in a crowd. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 14:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

There was a vote ages ago and I won, saying Kesha was reliably sourced as crunkcore. But minority admins took umbrage at the result and decided to fight back against this, hence the current wording has been created to keep them happy. NO RECOUNT OF THE VOTE IS NEEDED Syxxpackid420 (talk) 03:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

A simple vote isn't the right way to go anyway, as per WP:POLL. User Eduemoni makes a good point about there only being one source that cannot be substantiated. I'm not sure whether this was considered before.--¿3family6 _contribs 15:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

If it helps, here's a couple more sources describing her work as some variety of crunk:

• Usinger, Mike (September 8, 2011). "The flash, trash, and philosophy of Ke$ha". Straight.com.
• Karpis, Paulina (September 28, 2010). "Students look forward to crunk-pop star Ke$ha in concert". The Dartmouth.

Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 23:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that helps with crunk, but the "core" part, as in crunkcore, isn't borne out by these sources.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

There's also this for Kesha being emo http://923now.radio.com/2010/02/27/apparently-kesha-was-emowhen-she-was-a-kid/ Syxxpackid420 (talk) 02:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

How does that help this discussion?--¿3family6 _contribs 13:57, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Because emo is a stylistic origin of crunkcore Syxxpackid420 (talk) 14:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I found another source so I'm taking out the weasel words Syxxpackid420 (talk) 15:04, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm really doubting that this is a reliable source; I'd bet it uses Wikipedia as a source: http://washington.uwc.edu/student-life/ubiq/documents/Aprilfools2011.pdf 147.136.249.20 (talk) 01:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

It is a published magazine and certainly professional enough to pass WP:RS Syxxpackid420 (talk) 00:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

It's an April Fools issue. Dispute solved.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:26, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't mean the source is unreliable. Its from a properly published source, crunkcore is aimed at young people like the ones reading it and the genre description is not satirical Syxxpackid420 (talk) 17:55, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

There is absolutely no way for us to know whether the crunkcore term was used seriously or not. A joke source is completely unacceptable, I can't even believe that this is a discussion.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:45, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I have found yet another source (this would be the 4th) so please can the insistance that one writer called Ke$ha crunkcore be cofined to the dustbin. Millionaires and Family Force 5 do not have any proper sources or use screamed vocals. http://www.punknews.org/review/9598 Syxxpackid420 (talk) 00:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

You're going to hate me, but that is not a staff review. Only staff content from Punknews is reliable. I don't know what you mean about Millionaires and FF5 being improperly sourced, they both have reliable sources explicitly calling them crunkcore, which is more than we can say about Kesha. And I count this as the third source, so I must have missed something. There is the allmusic source, the April fools source, and now this one. Which one did I miss?--¿3family6 _contribs 01:39, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Punknews mentions that we live in a "crunkcore-y, Ke$ha-y world", but doesn't call her music crunkcore, so there's actually only two sources: the Allmusic source and the April Fools source. Nite-Sirk (talk) 01:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Have you actually read the sources. They say things like crunk-punk, crunk-rock and scrunk. Very few if any say crunkcore. Crunkcore-y is much stronger than mosty of them. Millionaires aren't sourced and blood on the dance floor aren't even on wiki but noone seems to care about this Syxxpackid420 (talk) 08:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

What do you mean Millionaires aren't sourced? Both the Boston Phoenix and Revolver both call the group crunkcore! The Punknews source is not done by a staff, so it doesn't matter how vague or how clear it is, it still is unreliable.--¿3family6 _contribs 12:43, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I should warn you Syxxpackkid that you are becoming borderline disruptive. You are continuously changing the Kesha mention that came out of the RfC consensus, without gaining a consensus of any kind. Your behavior here is basically slow edit warring. Please do not change anything in the Kesha sentence without first establishing a consensus.--¿3family6 _contribs 12:49, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

No i just need to find a reliable source, then the sentence stating there is only one source (the one full of weasel words and which implies incompetence of the writer) will be more invalid then it is. I removed blood on the dance floor as they have been deleted for wikipedia. That revolver source is a dead link but the other citation does work. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 05:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I would recommend that even if you find an unequivocal source for Kesha, you should still post it here and let several different editors okay it. Just because this is such a controversial, hot-button issue.--¿3family6 _contribs 17:06, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Upstart Magazine source

http://www.upstart.net.au/2010/09/14/teenage-dream-album-review/ Syxxpackid420 (talk) 19:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

My opinion: First, is Upstart Magazine reliable? They have a professional editorial staff, and appear to be a college newspaper for emerging journalists. So far, so good. But are they reputable? An article was written on them by Journalism.co.uk, which is published by Mousetrap Media. The magazine was also audited for circulation by the New Zealand Audit Bureau of Circulation. All the numbers say 0, but that might be because the site is online. The point is, this Bureau considers them a real publication. Finally, an article by one student was reprinted by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. It wasn't about music, but I'm not sure if that is a problem. So, the source appears to be a reputable magazine.

But what about the actual article content? The full sentence reads: "Do Ke$ha’s drunken ramblings count as crunkcore, hip-hop or electropop?" This to me does not look like a certain judgement to me, if anything it shows the vagueness of the label. But, on the other hand it shows that there is some discussion as to whether Kesha is crunkcore. If combined with the Allmusic ref, it might be enough to give a blanket statement that says "Kesha is considered crunkcore by x and x." Another idea could be just to expand the prose for all of the other entries listed, excluding 3OH!3 and Brokencyde, who are already discussed in the article. This should probably be done whether the Kesha statement is changed much or not.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. What do others think?--¿3family6 _contribs 22:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The article already uses the word considered my point here has been that the allmusic source is not an anolomy, Ke$ha is considered crunkcore by some and crunkpop by others. She has said her next album will be rock anyway, that may settle the dispute when it drops. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 23:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree with 3family6 and perhaps the citations should be expanded and ellaborated in the text rather than just two source next to Kesha. It will be also help if someone wants to remove her from the article. Jonjonjohny (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I think that sentence is way too vague to be useful. 147.136.249.20 (talk) 00:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Your wrong, it is actually more useful than the allmusic source in that people thought that source was being used ironically, as they did the university paper April edition. There is clearly no irony in this source. How on earth could it help people remove her from the article. I agree that using the sources for bands we have to expand the article as 3family6 suggested would make it a better article. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 17:54, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I think, and I could be wrong about this, but I think the problem that 147 has with the source is that it doesn't actually say Ke$ha is crunkcore.--¿3family6 _contribs 19:49, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

You are correct. 147.136.249.20 (talk) 22:01, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

You are wrong. Read it sources it says "Ke$ha's drunken ramblings count as crunkcore. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 20:04, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Here is what it says:

Do Ke$ha’s drunken ramblings count as crunkcore, hip-hop or electropop? Should The Mars Volta be filed under psychedelic-rock, jazz-fusion or progressive-punk? Are Godspeed You! Black Emperor an embodiment of post-rock or should we just call them alternative?

You're obviously choosing to ignore the word "Do" and the question mark. 147.136.249.20 (talk) 21:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

That is a standard method of quotation and always has been Syxxpackid420 (talk) 11:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

What is standard?--¿3family6 _contribs 12:56, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Sigh.. so how many sources must I find to refute your claim there is only one, as I am on four sources now as the page is protected the argument it may get vandalised is no longer valid Syxxpackid420 (talk) 15:57, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

No, we only have two reliable sources. Out of those, one poses the mention of crunkcore in the form of a question, which leaves us with the Allmusic claim. And the RfC consensus is that the full quote along with direct attribution should be extracted for the article, not just a "Kesha is called crunkcore" statement.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Precisely, there are two reliable sources so as Wikipedia is not a democracy, we should not LIE and say there is only one in a phrase full of more weasel words than David Cameron Syxxpackid420 (talk) 16:05, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Where is the lie? The one source does not claim Kesha to be crunkcore, so it should not be used as a source calling Kesha crunkcore. So far, the only person who has called Kesha crunkcore is David Jeffries of Allmusic. And the last RfC felt that the whole quote should be extracted. The thing is, all of the mentions should really be elaborated. But this mention in particular is highly contentious and many editors feel that it is vague. Do you want me to open another RfC again?--¿3family6 _contribs 18:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Depends what an rfc is cos I don't feel like playnig rugby Syxxpackid420 (talk) 17:04, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

After two RfCs, time for the next step. I've posted a discussion thread on the dispute resolution noticeboard. Link is here: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Crunkcore, Talk:Crunkcore, Kesha, Talk:Kesha/Archive 4, Talk:Kesha/Archive 2--¿3family6 _contribs 23:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Stylistic origins: Heavy metal music

Heavy metal music is not one of crunkcore's stylistic origins, and no references in the article suggest that it is. One reference says that the genre contains "metal licks," a vague slang expression. The article says nothing more about the genre's relationship to heavy metal. At best the reference suggests that some crunkcore artists are influenced by heavy metal, but claiming that heavy metal is one of the stylistic origins of the genre based solely on an ambiguous informality is nonsense. --♪ ChrisBkoolio ... (Talk) 22:05, 8 February 2012 (UTC) what's ambiguous about it. Its sourced so it stays Syxxpackid420 (talk) 03:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

It's an in-passing phrase that is not supported anywhere else. While it deserves mention in the article, it is not nearly strong enough to go in the infobox.--¿3family6 _contribs 13:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I concur.Heavy metal has nothing to do with the origin of this genre.--MightySaiyan (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Barry Manilow

Something about this source used to support Barry Manilow looks suspicious: [1]. Dallas News is reliable, but something doesn't seem quite right. I might be mistaken, but this looks like gaming the system to me. Is there a way to investigat this?--¿3family6 _contribs 13:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

This source is either mistaken or somebody's idea of a joke. I doubt there are any other sources out there that identify Manilow as a crunkcore artist. Gobōnobō ^{+ c} 09:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Please read WP:JDLI and WP:VNT. The source is reliable. Stop removing it. 76.183.38.120 (talk) 09:31, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

This isn't about that, at least for me. If it is verifiable, than I don't have to like it (I really could care less). But the whole situation appears suspicious. When I have time, I'm going to do some digging.--¿3family6 _contribs 12:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

It's a bit of passing sarcasm. We're talking someone with Sinatra-level fame: the fact that this appears in exactly one place shows it shouldn't be taken seriously. Besides, have you heard any of his stuff? Mangoe (talk) 19:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I have the feeling that the editor putting this up is trying to make a point. But the problem is that we have, on the surface, what appears to be a legitimate source. I have my doubts, though, about this mention. The entire article seems to be satirical.--¿3family6 _contribs 19:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Nothing seems satirical to me. Light celebrity news, sure. But major newspapers aren't in the satire business. What are you referring to? 76.183.38.120 (talk) 08:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

We aren't obligated to believe every stupid thing anyone says, even if they are "reputable". Look, I grew up at the height of his popularity; his music was on the radio constantly. And it is the antithesis of crunkcore. If he had suddenly changed his style, it would be commented on at length, everywhere, a change approximately as notable as Quentin Tarantino announcing that he was going to take over the next Winnie the Pooh film. It wouldn't be one word in one article. Mangoe (talk) 19:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion doesn't matter, though. This is wikipedia, verifiability is what matters. Please read up on it. 76.183.38.120 (talk) 08:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Your little tirade ends here. WP:VERIFY is not the be all and end all. Given the almost certainty that you cannot find another reliable source that describes Manilow as 'crunkcore', the assertion falls within the grounds of WP:FRINGE. Per WP:FRINGE 'A theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea,[1] and reliable sources must be cited that affirm the relationship of the marginal idea to the mainstream idea in a serious and substantial manner. "Crunkcore legend" is neither a serious nor substantial reference to the artist and his supposed genre. We've given you far too much credit (and time) for something that is clearly an attempt at WP:POINT. -SFK2 (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and if you actually read WP:VNT properly, then you would already know this. -SFK2 (talk) 12:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

2013 dispute

User:172.243.37.178 repeatedly changes "screamo" to "post-hardcore", even though screamo is clearly sourced in multiple sources, and have not bothered to explain their edits. I would appreciate it if they voiced their reasoning here.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Your sources use the genre name "screamo" incorrectly, and that is the problem. What they are referring to is post-hardcore. Simply because multiple "credible" sources use the word does not mean it is correct. Screamo as a genre, and not a catch-all phrase for "music with screaming," is not in any way associated with this genre. I have sourced my changes as well. Why are you so obsessed perpetuating this horrible misuse of the word?172.243.37.178 (talk) 19:34, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

It is true that you provided a source for post-hardcore, but that one is already listed in the article. What you need to provide sources for is that the association between crunkcore and screamo is a mislabeling. Even then, the screamo association should still be listed, but will have the caveat that this is a point of contention. Basically, your claim that The Phoenix misused the term, whether correct or not, needs support from reliable, secondary sources. Your opinion, however correct it may be, is not sufficient for Wikipedia. If you do find sources that dispute the claims by publications such as The Guardian, Revolver, and The Phoenix, I will be happy to help put that material into the article.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Thank you for taking the discussion here as instead of pursuing an edit war.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah-hah! These three sources all mention that crunkcore is crunk with screamo vocals: [2], [3], [4] (I'm not sure how reliable the student papers are, I'll research them). I'll put in this specification.

I have no objections towards this! I would also like to apologize for my fairly childish behavior before. However, I think it has lead to an improvement in the article.172.243.37.178 (talk) 21:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I'm glad this got sorted out!--¿3family6 _contribs 21:55, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Revival 2015

Not sure if this source is reliable but it appears the genre is making a comeback (nostalgia ain't what it used to be) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.13.224 (talk) 13:20, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

References

That source is probably reliable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

If you say so Syxxpackid420 (talk) 23:07, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Kesha

Another source [5] Please feel free to rip it apart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syxxpackid420 (talk • contribs) 14:29, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

References

Four problems: First, it's just one song cited, which does not make Ke$ha a crunkcore artist as a whole. Two, 'crunkcore' is cited with commas, meaning it's hard to know how seriously the author uses the term. Three: Who is the author, anyway? The source doesn't mention it. Four: The site is a catering company, not a music-focused publication, so it has no expertise in music criticism.--¿3family6 _contribs 11:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

1. Crunkcoore artists make crunkcore songs,2 really, again claiming sarcasm. I see how Barry Manilow is sarcastic but Kesha not so much 3&4. why does it have to be from the music industry to be a reliable source Syxxpackid420 (talk) 17:08, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

1. Yes, but claiming she's a crunkcore artist because of 1 song is inference and an overstatement. Extol wrote some acoustic instrumentals, does that make them an acoustic instrumental band? 2: No, I'm not claiming sarcasm. But when quotes are used, they typically mean that an author is qualifying a statement - but in this case we don't know what exactly that qualification is. 3&4: Because that is where the expertise is. What does a catering company know about music genres? They might be experts, they might not, but without information demonstrating their musical expertise we can't know whether they are qualified to speak on the issue or not. And who is it who is speaking anyway?--¿3family6 _contribs 02:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

[6] 1. No, the article doesn't claim any artists are crunkcore, only that they might be. Read it again. 2. This genre is relatively unknown, quote marks are necessary in a descriptive sense 3. Under hobbies in her profile, it clearly states listening to music and dancing. Attention to detail is also cited. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 07:48, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! That takes care of the authorship question. It would be nice to have third-party source to confirm her expertise, but the resume might be sufficient. The mention of Kesha is still very weak though - at best it could be used to support a claim that "Your Love is My Drug" has been labeled crunkcore.--¿3family6 _contribs 14:24, 13 May 2014 (UTC) Ok have tried to make the edit you suggested, had difficulty embedding the song. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 08:18, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

http://www.videogum.com/188102/keha-and-3oh3-doing-everything-in-their-power-to-ruin-summer/music-related-content/ source number 7. Is it noteworthy this guy wants to kill his grandchildren, might have something to do with the criticism this genre receives from old people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.128.169 (talk) 12:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC) http://www.sputnikmusic.com/list.php?listid=134914 Kesha, Lil Jon and a person named Screamer are mentioned as stylistic origins of this genre. This would definitely add legitimacy to the claim of others that she is the Queen of Crunkcore — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.128.169 (talk) 12:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

That first source has nothing to do with crunkcore, and is just some commenter ranting. It has no real merit, and there is no indication that that author is a professional. The second link is just a message board, which is completely unacceptable as a reliable source.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:09, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I believe Spin magazine is a reliable source. I quote "a particularly punk-rock concept with crunk cadences" with relation to ke$ha Syxxpackid420 (talk) 13:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

References

That does not at all mean that she performs crunkcore on the album - implying that is original synthesis. Honestly, why can't we just drop this subject? It's been like five years now, and things had finally become stable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC) This is fusion genre so not original research. It is also a genre falling in popularity, it is important encyclopedialically to establish artists who had commercial success under the banner Syxxpackid420 (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Crunk Punk

References

And your point is what? That she performed a "new wave/dance pop/crunk" style on one album, and on another, different included a song which "has a surprisingly punk-rock opening with its rhythmic drums," that is supported by sources. But where is it supported that she performs crunk punk?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

"Thanks, that helps with crunk, but the "core" part, as in crunkcore, isn't borne out by these sources.--¿3family6 contribs 02:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)" You appear more contradictory than The Terminator and continually change the goalposts. Agreed? Syxxpackid420 (talk) 15:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I haven't changed the goalposts at all - where is the reliable source that clearly and unambiguously identifies Kesha as crunkcore? Allmusic and the more questionable Tanja Lynn source use the term very ambiguously. The other sources establish the Kesha is sometimes crunk, sometimes punk-leaning, but not not specifically call her crunk-punk or crunkcore. Your comment above that "this is a fusion genre so not original research" is incorrect - you are right that crunkcore is a fusion genre, but that doesn't mean that because one source calls one album crunk, and another source mentions that a single song on a different album has a punk-rock opening (note that this doesn't even mean that that one song is punk, let alone the rest of the album), Kesha is therefore crunkcore. I'm thinking that, for whatever reason, you are not understanding what Wikipedia means by original synthesis. It basically means that we as editors may not, in an article, say, for example, "well, this source says that x plays classical on such-and-such album, and plays jazz on this other album, so therefore x performs a classical-jazz fusion." Even if x plays both classical and jazz on the same album, we cannot write that they play a jazz-classical fusion, unless a source explicitly says so. If a source does not say so, all that we can say is that they perform both jazz and classical on the same album.

As for the Spin source, you blatantly misquoted it. It does not anywhere call the album "a particularly punk-rock concept with crunk cadences." It comments in one section that "Thing is, "we're-all-in-this-together" is not a particularly punk-rock concept, at least in the world's-forgotten-boy sense originally conceived by Iggy Pop...," which has nothing to do at all with describing Kesha's style, and in another section it mentions that Kesha "mixes a few buzzy dubstep breaks and sizzurped crunk cadences into the strobelight bosh...," which describes some stylistic elements but is by no means a clear-cut description of her style. Those are totally isolated statements that you strung together to say something that the source did not say at all - I don't know whether this was confusion on you part or intentional deception. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that you confused these two separate sentences.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

It most certainly is not a misquote; rather, it is selective quoting I have used the exact same words. However, admittedly it should have read "a particularly punk-rock concept...with crunk cadences". This is quoted as intended and is an acceptable method of reporting which has been in operation for centuries. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

No it is not an acceptable method of reporting. You cannot miss out the word "not" before your quote and edit out a whole paragraph that dislocates one sentence from another and believe that it is in any way representative of what is being said here.--SabreBD (talk) 12:55, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok in which case we need to note which Ke$ha songs are crunk, which are punk and which are crunkcore. Get onto that task Sabre, if you think you can spell them correctly. Once this is done, the article needs to be discussed further. For example, do we really need to know Brokencyde have been compared to Katie Melua. Surely stated their music is much-maligned by critics would be sufficient Syxxpackid420 (talk) 10:35, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Sauce?

Would this be a reliable source. I feel it could improve the article if so — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syxxpackid420 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

References

No, that is just a random blog. The blogger did write for Under the Gun Review and OurStage, but I don't think that those are considered reliable sources for Wikipedia, either.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:30, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I also question the blog's reliability since the author clearly is very poorly informed in popular music history. She says "the once very much divided worlds of rock and hip-hop have merged." Um, what about "Walk This Way" (Run-D.M.C.) and "Bring the Noise" (Anthrax version)? What about Beastie Boys, Rage Against the Machine, Faith No More, P.O.D., and Korn? Clearly, this blogger doesn't know what they are talking about.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:39, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Did you even read it. Not only does it say "Though the seeds of this movement were likely planted long ago" but it also goes on to state that it is a Fallout Boy meets Lil Wayne style we're looking for, making all the bands you cited irrelevant. You seem determined to prevent this article improving so why not merge it to rapcore or something equally encompassing of the broader [rap rock] movement. 81.101.109.163 (talk) 21:01, 19 August 2015 (UTC) Syxxpackid420 (talk) 19:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter anyway, since the source is self-published and she's not a well-known expert.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:10, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Why are you here if improving this article "doesn't matter anyway" Syxxpackid420 (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

What is that supposed to even mean? I meant that it doesn't matter about my complaint about the author's discussion of rap and rock fusion, since the author is not a reliable source.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

her album Animal is...of the same musical and lyrical cliches crunkcore feeds upon. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Still at this? That's a message forum. Completely unreliable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

References

. This source actually confirms Kesha is not crunkcore. It may be useful in making the criticism part more NPOV, though. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 12:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that. It just calls Kesha pop, so I'll add in that descriptor.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Updates

Hi everyone. I updated the intro:

Crunkcore (also called crunk punk, crunk rock, screamo-crunk, and scrunk) is a fusion genre characterized by the combination of cultural and musical elements from crunk, screamo, and emo; the genre often features screamed vocals, dance-pop beats, and "sexually provocative lyrics."

It previously just said it was a combination of crunk and the vocal style of screamo. However, according to sources in the body text, some crunkcore groups do not use screaming. The defining characteristics, according to the references, is the fusion of emo and screamo culture with crunk-themed lyrics and electronically produced beats. If you have any concerns, please discuss here. Thanks!

--Chrisbkoolio (talk) 01:23, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

We should add Kesha with an early tag as she meets the new criteria Syxxpackid420 108.171.128.169 (talk) 12:04, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll be updating the Notable artists section to feature a list as opposed to intext prose. Each entry will need to be referenced. If a reliable reference can be found then she could be included, however I'm pretty sure only 1 or 2 of her songs qualify, and that's already mentioned in the article. More to come - I'll likely make that update this week. --Chrisbkoolio (talk) 20:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

What about artists such as The Bunny The Bear, Jeffrey Star and Deuce who are popular enough to have Wikipedia articles but not to be mentioned when specifically reviewing the genre, as most of the sources do. Syxxpackid420 (talk) 13:41, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Yea, there are certainly more than those currently listed. Any notable artists can be added to this list if a reference is added alongside the artist that specifically refers to them as "crunkcore." --Chrisbkoolio (talk) 14:08, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Crunkcore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110213111847/http://www.revolvermag-digital.com/revolver/200905/?pm=2&z=fw&pvieww=992&zin=172&u1=texterity&pg=62&fm=1 to http://www.revolvermag-digital.com/revolver/200905/?pm=2&z=fw&pvieww=992&zin=172&u1=texterity&pg=62&fm=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)