Talk:Pop-punk

Blink's huge representation in pop punk

Reading the article it only showcases Blink-182 being just another band that got mainstream, while not refering to them as being responsible for its huge influence in developing the subgenre, that it's often overshadowed by critic darlings Green Day. I made changes that I considered "major" in the summary, putting Green Day (along w/ Rancid and Offspring) in prompting punk rock (not pop punk) to mainstream success, while pointing blink as the band that made pop punk mainstream as a whole in late 90s, because of their glossy production made the band a household name in the subgenre, that propelled them to a more radio-friendly sound than their contemporaries. ManneredMan (talk) 20:51, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Revival in 2018-20

Hello, I think it's worth mentioning there has been a revival of sorts over the last couple of years, with Blink-182's new album 'Nine' to the reunion of MCR, and the return of guitars in many pop radio settings (see Demi Lovato's 'emo' release of one of her songs recently). I do not believe who ever keeps deleting the title 'revival' that I have added has reason to. There certainly is something going on and I even included news stories pondering it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:3008:202:AA00:35E6:396:B1D7:5301 (talk) 22:05, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:SYNTH in old characteristics section

Please stop restoring the horribly sourced version of the "characteristics" section. Most of the claims are not supported by the sources. It's unarguably preferable to present the sources' opinions on pop punk individually than to bundle them together and pretend that they're each describing the same concept (they're not!). ili (talk) 01:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Likewise, please stop doing the same for the lead. The body has several different contradicting definitions of pop-punk and it's not Wikipedia's job to take sides when each pov is equally valid.ili (talk) 22:39, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Criticism section is not NPOV

The criticism section seems to be something someone added because they personally don’t like pop punk. Articles about similar genres don’t have criticism sections, and pop punk has been popular for years (in the 2000’s as well as the last 3 or so years) so I don’t feel it’s warranted because there clearly isn’t a consensus that pop punk is bad music. Cretaceousa (talk) 03:23, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Pop punk article title

Can we remove the hyphen from “pop punk” on its article’s title? The hyphen is not used in other articles, nor in its own article. I already edited the introductory paragraph to remove all instances of the hyphen. This is just something I realized. Ded Meem (talk) 03:24, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

No. I have restored the hyphen. Simply because the hyphen is not used in another article means that it is dated and is a problem that needs fixing on that respective article. There has been some arguing over how to render the title, but ILIL's reasoning at requested moves was sound (this number may have changed): Most sources (particularly books and web articles centred on the genre) typeset "pop punk" as "pop-punk". This can be seen in the "References" section, where you'll find that 17 headlines spell the term as "pop-punk", whereas only 8 say "pop punk". dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, it's unfortunate that the predominately accepted typeset includes a hyphen, because it's not logical at all.

"Pop" in "pop punk" is an adjective, not a prefix. For example, pop rock is not "pop-rock"; it's "pop rock" (the current predominately accepted form, that is). Equivalently, it's never "country-rock"; it's "country rock". It's never "blues-rock"; it's just "blues rock". It's never "rap-metal"; it's simply "rap metal".

Genres such as "post-X" and "proto-X" include the use of a hyphen because those are prefixes being used to alter the actual raw meaning of the noun, whereas fusion genres and sub-genres use adjectives, or adjectival nouns, to describe a particular variety of the original noun.

The above adjectival noun examples work the same exact way as actual adjectives do:

• It's not "soft-rock"; it's "soft rock".

• It's not "hardcore-punk"; it's "hardcore punk".

• It's not "progressive-metal"; it's "progressive metal".

If the presence of the hyphen is considered standard typeset today, then I guess that's the standard typeset today. It's still linguistically incorrect.

Maybe one day it will be rectified such that the accepted standard will omit the hyphen...

Jdjd021 (talk) 18:57, 30 March 2023 (UTC)