![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The information about Gold and Platinum certification is highly inaccurate. I just checked on the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of Ameria) online searchable database of Gold and Platinum albums. The first album and In Love and Death are both Gold, not Platinum and Multi-Platinum. The newest album, has yet to even reach Gold status. The sources sited on the Wikipedia page are not accurate. Also, as a side note, saying an album is "has sold well" without any documentation just doesn't look good on a Wikipedia page, especially when it hasn't come close to Gold certification (the first acheivable sales award) close to a year after release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.207.9 ( talk) 06:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Some IPs have been vandalizing the History section lately with comments like "The Used sucks" and "The Used, one of the gayest bands ever". Keep an eye out for this stuff, and revert it as necessary.
Now for the issue of their genre.. They clearly have alternative influences, but those are superseded by their emo, or "emotive hardcore" style. Anyone who makes the claim that they are just alternative has most likely only heard their singles. The fact that they are first and foremost an emo band is apparent on songs like "Maybe Memories", "Say Days Ago", "A Box Full of Sharp Objects", "Take It Away", "Listening", "Sound Effects and Overdramatics", "I'm a Fake", etc. Alternative proponents often point to songs like "The Taste of Ink", "Blue and Yellow", "Greener with the Scenery", "Noise and Kisses", "All That I've Got", "Cut up Angels", etc. This doesn't hold, as those songs are constructed like power ballads, and maintain the emo sound, and screaming. Which brings me to the biggest reason why they aren't alternative -- the vocal style. Alternative rock doesn't have the kind of screaming Bert does, which is influenced by emo/post-hardcore. While their latest album took a turn in the direction of alternative, the emo is still apparent, and their b-sides are a lot like their older songs. I would call their latest effort "emo-prog" or "emo-crossover", like MCR's The Black Parade album.
To sum it up, The Used have songs where their alternative influences are quite apparent, yet they still end up sounding like themselves, and emo/screamo. They have songs that are straight up hardcore, softer acoustic ones(every emo band has a few), alt-rock influenced power ballads, and the rest of their material would fall somewhere in between. Basically, they take emo/screamo and make it their own, sounding like nothing else, and that leads to confusion.
This is relevant to the information in the article, because a lot of ppl have been changing the genres in the infobox. If the article is to be improved, we have to come to a consensus. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 18:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Due to the logo being removed from this article, i recommend people join this discussion on logos Logos Discussion ( 86.159.81.139 ( talk) 15:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC))
I'm not really involved in contributing to this article, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents and give a little levity with regard to the seeming disagreements over the band's genres. As far as the infobox goes, see Template:Infobox Musical artist#Genre: "Aim for generality (e.g. [[Hip hop music|Hip hop]] rather than [[East Coast hip hop]])." So, "rock" or "alternative rock" should be just fine. Further discussion of what genres or subgenres the band's music falls under (ie. emo, screamo, etc.) should be discussed in the article body, with references to reliable third-party sources. The only genres that should be listed in the infobox are those that are mentioned in the article body. It shouldn't be necessary to use references in the infobox, since the genres are already referenced in the article body (plus it just makes the infobox look cluttered, and it's supposed to be a simple at-a-glance thing). I've got several reliable sources with articles about The Used laying around (Alternative Press, Spin, Rolling Stone, etc.) and they all describe how the band fits into these different genres. So there's plenty of supporting source material out there, and there's no reason to go on arguing or reverting genre disputes when we should just be writing what the sources tell us. Discussions about genres shouldn't be added into the article without references, and only the genres discussed in the article should be listed in the infobox. -- IllaZilla ( talk) 23:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Fleurbutterfly 19:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Please discontinue the ongoing edit war between USEDfan, Pwnage8, Fezmar9, and a few others, as edit warring is not productive, so please settle on a resolution, as most of the edits have been by these users within the past few days. Thanks. ~ A H 1( T C U) 21:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, so there seem to be two main disputes with the infobox:
Should the genre be emo or emocore? Considering emocore redirects to emo, I see no sense in using emocore, as this could potentially lead to confusion. Any further comments?
Personally, I would suggest removing those that do not have wikipedia articles (what sense is there in listing these bands if there is no article to give further info.), but I am open to leaving them there. As for Good Charlotte, NTD and Rancid, their reasons for inclusion are clear, and there should be no argument.
So, to the following users:
before continuing this edit war, please explain why you oppose this content. Do not revert the page to your preferred version, you must clearly discuss such changes here first. Nouse4aname ( talk) 18:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Considering that the first three of those bands are essentially The Used we see today with a variation of members, I don't believe there is any reason to leave them there at all. Kokiri kid ( talk) 06:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I would agree with Nouse that any redlinked names should be de-listed. Carl.bunderson ( talk) 04:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
To facilitate discussion, I'll call out some of the apparent conflicts in this current round of edit warring. Please be civil, refrain from personal attacks, and a review of the relevant Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines may be helpful – Zedla ( talk) 09:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
(also see "Emo..." above, and the Talk:The Used#Genres section)
which ones are appropriate for inclusion?
i added a genre paragraph to the page last night since over the years there has been so much confussion about their genre, the table has a link that if clicked thakes u to the paragraph, instead of listing genres on the main table, they are now mention in the paragraph and other info added about their genre being so hard to pick and what they say about it. USEDfan ( talk) 17:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, according to USEDFan, ive been "vandalising" this article for "removing half a paragraph of sourced information". Let me clear up a few things: 1. I was the one who added the source in the first place, USEDFan didnt even have any proper sources to back up the genres which he/she claimed. 2. i did not just remove it, i changed it. Its called EDITING, you remove existing information and add other information which you consider to be more accurate.-- SilverOrion ( talk) 07:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
this user has changed what me, Pwange8, and FatalError worked on today, i started the paragrap, pwange8 edited it and then fatalerror edited it more and everything was fine, however silverorion kept removing half the page so i changed it back and they kept putitng it their way so i reported it and the page got locked, their edits remove half of a paragraph and put up wrong info as they say bert stated the used arent scremo when all he siad is that they dont want ot be scremo, so them removing half a paragraph of sourced info is what i thought of as vandalism so now th epage is locked on the way they want it to be and not the way that the rest of us pretty muched agreed on and loved. USEDfan ( talk) 07:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
The paragraph right now is very biased towards SilverOrion's POV that they're "not screamo". I'd appreciate it if there was more detail, like there used to be. I'm not saying that version was 100% perfect, but it was a good start, and SilverOrion changing it made it worse. I also don't like the fact that he was constantly removing the link to the band's OFFICIAL youtube channel, and masking it as a "minor edit". [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] This is definitely malicious behaviour on his part. However, I don't agree with all the edit warring. That was just silly. Both USEDfan and SilverOrion are equally responsible for getting this page locked. You'd think if not after the third round of reverts, they'd get to actually discussing after the fourth time around :| They must've done it 9 or 10 times. Now the page is locked because of this, and no improvements can be made at all. Quite sad. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 13:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Remove the first line completely; it is unnecessary, just go straight in to a description of genres like this:
The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock,(REFERENCE HERE) post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo,(REFERENCE HERE), screamo,(REFERENCE HERE) and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo.(REFERENCE HERE)
We want to establish ourselves as something brighter than just this dimly lit singled-out genre that's going to fade away in a couple years. We're just rock kids.
As for removing the YouTube links, I think generally they get removed because of copyright violations, however as this is an official site, it seems fair for it to stay. Also, here it says there is no "blanket ban" on YouTube in the external links section. Nouse4aname ( talk) 13:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
So do we all agree that the link to their youtube channel should be re-inserted? -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 16:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Since USEDFan insists on bring it up.. i thought i might point out some of the problems with it.
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 01:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
this is the paragraph created by me, pwange8, and fatalerror:
"The Used's sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifying the band's genre of music. The mix of poppy vocals and screaming have led to the band being labeled as numerous different sub genres of rock, including alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, screamo, and pop punk. The band members have said that they don't care what genre they are or what people classify them as, as long as they make good music. [8] However, Bert McCracken has said that they do not want to be labeled screamo, due to it being a "genre of music that is eating us alive right now" and because it is "going to fade away in a couple years". [9] Nonetheless, they are still often classified as such. Since the band does not say what genre they are, it appears that it will always be a disputed topic amongst fans."
and this is the current vandalized one by silverorion:
"The Used sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifiy the band's genre of music. They have been classified under many genres such as alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, punk pop, etc. When the band is asked about what genre of music they are, they never give a direct answer. Bert McCracken states that they are not screamo, commenting: "We want to establish ourselves as something brighter than just this dimly lit singled-out genre that's going to fade away in a couple years. We're just rock kids[24]"
and here are the problems with it: 1. they removed half a paragraph of sourced inforamtion. 2. they made it say that bert states the band isnt scremo when all he said was that he didnt want to be classified as scremo 3. they removed all the genre info about how the band lists themselves on myspace 4. they are removing that the band is calssified as screamo from the list of genre in the paragraph 5. they are removing the closing sentence that sums up and finishes off the paragraph USEDfan ( talk) 01:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 01:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
NONE OF WHICH SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT IT BEING SCREAMO. -- SilverOrion ( talk) 01:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,543090,00.html USEDfan ( talk) 01:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
@SilverOrion: Those Sputnik reviews are not staff reviews, so they're not reliable either. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 13:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
this is how noused4name said it shud be:
The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock,(REFERENCE HERE) post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo,(REFERENCE HERE), screamo,(REFERENCE HERE) and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo.(REFERENCE HERE)
i think it covers both versions well and meets in the middle so me and silverorion should prob agree to this one, whats every1 think, if we could agree to this we can call and admin over to unlock the page and we can fix it. USEDfan ( talk) 01:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
this is the paragraph created by me, pwange8, and fatalerror:
"The Used's sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifying the band's genre of music. The mix of poppy vocals and screaming have led to the band being labeled as numerous different sub genres of rock, including alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, screamo, and pop punk. The band members have said that they don't care what genre they are or what people classify them as, as long as they make good music. [1] However, Bert McCracken has said that they do not want to be labeled screamo, due to it being a "genre of music that is eating us alive right now" and because it is "going to fade away in a couple years".[2] Nonetheless, they are still often classified as such. Since the band does not say what genre they are, it appears that it will always be a disputed topic amongst fans."
and this is the current vandalized one by silverorion:
"The Used sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifiy the band's genre of music. They have been classified under many genres such as alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, punk pop, etc. When the band is asked about what genre of music they are, they never give a direct answer. Bert McCracken states that they are not screamo, commenting: "We want to establish ourselves as something brighter than just this dimly lit singled-out genre that's going to fade away in a couple years. We're just rock kids[24]"
this is how noused4name said it shud be:
"The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock,(REFERENCE HERE) post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo,(REFERENCE HERE), screamo,(REFERENCE HERE) and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo.(REFERENCE HERE)"
i think it covers both versions well and meets in the middle so me and silverorion should prob agree to this one, whats every1 think?
USEDfan (
talk)
02:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
heres an version with some sources:
The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock [13], post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo, [14], screamo, [15] and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo. [16] USEDfan ( talk) 19:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Not really that different but yeah...
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 04:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
what do u think of that? if we amke it like this we will no that no wrong or right gerne has been listed and then the arguement about what shud be listed in the opening sentence would be settled. USEDfan ( talk) 05:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
(UTC)
Can the appropriate citations be inserted into the paragraph? I have added fact tags to where I think they should go. Also, "the debates are seemingly endless" doesn't have a very encyclopedic tone. Bill ( talk| contribs) 10:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
After all this discussion, you go and change it to something you KNOW i disagree with. Fine, if you must have genres, use my original proposal
We do NOT need to add screamo into the first sentence because the the next sentence is covering the issue. DONT MAKE THIS ANY MORE DIFFICULT-- SilverOrion ( talk) 08:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
yea its very tempting for me to just change it as i please, but since im not a complete moron who goes and breaks an agreement less than a day after it was discussed, i wont. -- SilverOrion ( talk) 09:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 07:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I changed "Disputed" to "Rock (disputed)" in the infobox just like on Panic at the Disco's article. This will make it a bit more clear for people reading the article that have no clue about The Used. I realize "rock" is in the first sentence of the actual article, but the first place people glance is usually the infobox. -- Fatal Error 03:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Anyone have the exact article that the quote came from? It would be nice to be able to cite it and not have that ugly "citation needed" tag. -- Fatal Error 01:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The information about Gold and Platinum certification is highly inaccurate. I just checked on the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of Ameria) online searchable database of Gold and Platinum albums. The first album and In Love and Death are both Gold, not Platinum and Multi-Platinum. The newest album, has yet to even reach Gold status. The sources sited on the Wikipedia page are not accurate. Also, as a side note, saying an album is "has sold well" without any documentation just doesn't look good on a Wikipedia page, especially when it hasn't come close to Gold certification (the first acheivable sales award) close to a year after release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.207.9 ( talk) 06:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Some IPs have been vandalizing the History section lately with comments like "The Used sucks" and "The Used, one of the gayest bands ever". Keep an eye out for this stuff, and revert it as necessary.
Now for the issue of their genre.. They clearly have alternative influences, but those are superseded by their emo, or "emotive hardcore" style. Anyone who makes the claim that they are just alternative has most likely only heard their singles. The fact that they are first and foremost an emo band is apparent on songs like "Maybe Memories", "Say Days Ago", "A Box Full of Sharp Objects", "Take It Away", "Listening", "Sound Effects and Overdramatics", "I'm a Fake", etc. Alternative proponents often point to songs like "The Taste of Ink", "Blue and Yellow", "Greener with the Scenery", "Noise and Kisses", "All That I've Got", "Cut up Angels", etc. This doesn't hold, as those songs are constructed like power ballads, and maintain the emo sound, and screaming. Which brings me to the biggest reason why they aren't alternative -- the vocal style. Alternative rock doesn't have the kind of screaming Bert does, which is influenced by emo/post-hardcore. While their latest album took a turn in the direction of alternative, the emo is still apparent, and their b-sides are a lot like their older songs. I would call their latest effort "emo-prog" or "emo-crossover", like MCR's The Black Parade album.
To sum it up, The Used have songs where their alternative influences are quite apparent, yet they still end up sounding like themselves, and emo/screamo. They have songs that are straight up hardcore, softer acoustic ones(every emo band has a few), alt-rock influenced power ballads, and the rest of their material would fall somewhere in between. Basically, they take emo/screamo and make it their own, sounding like nothing else, and that leads to confusion.
This is relevant to the information in the article, because a lot of ppl have been changing the genres in the infobox. If the article is to be improved, we have to come to a consensus. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 18:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Due to the logo being removed from this article, i recommend people join this discussion on logos Logos Discussion ( 86.159.81.139 ( talk) 15:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC))
I'm not really involved in contributing to this article, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents and give a little levity with regard to the seeming disagreements over the band's genres. As far as the infobox goes, see Template:Infobox Musical artist#Genre: "Aim for generality (e.g. [[Hip hop music|Hip hop]] rather than [[East Coast hip hop]])." So, "rock" or "alternative rock" should be just fine. Further discussion of what genres or subgenres the band's music falls under (ie. emo, screamo, etc.) should be discussed in the article body, with references to reliable third-party sources. The only genres that should be listed in the infobox are those that are mentioned in the article body. It shouldn't be necessary to use references in the infobox, since the genres are already referenced in the article body (plus it just makes the infobox look cluttered, and it's supposed to be a simple at-a-glance thing). I've got several reliable sources with articles about The Used laying around (Alternative Press, Spin, Rolling Stone, etc.) and they all describe how the band fits into these different genres. So there's plenty of supporting source material out there, and there's no reason to go on arguing or reverting genre disputes when we should just be writing what the sources tell us. Discussions about genres shouldn't be added into the article without references, and only the genres discussed in the article should be listed in the infobox. -- IllaZilla ( talk) 23:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Fleurbutterfly 19:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Please discontinue the ongoing edit war between USEDfan, Pwnage8, Fezmar9, and a few others, as edit warring is not productive, so please settle on a resolution, as most of the edits have been by these users within the past few days. Thanks. ~ A H 1( T C U) 21:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, so there seem to be two main disputes with the infobox:
Should the genre be emo or emocore? Considering emocore redirects to emo, I see no sense in using emocore, as this could potentially lead to confusion. Any further comments?
Personally, I would suggest removing those that do not have wikipedia articles (what sense is there in listing these bands if there is no article to give further info.), but I am open to leaving them there. As for Good Charlotte, NTD and Rancid, their reasons for inclusion are clear, and there should be no argument.
So, to the following users:
before continuing this edit war, please explain why you oppose this content. Do not revert the page to your preferred version, you must clearly discuss such changes here first. Nouse4aname ( talk) 18:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Considering that the first three of those bands are essentially The Used we see today with a variation of members, I don't believe there is any reason to leave them there at all. Kokiri kid ( talk) 06:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I would agree with Nouse that any redlinked names should be de-listed. Carl.bunderson ( talk) 04:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
To facilitate discussion, I'll call out some of the apparent conflicts in this current round of edit warring. Please be civil, refrain from personal attacks, and a review of the relevant Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines may be helpful – Zedla ( talk) 09:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
(also see "Emo..." above, and the Talk:The Used#Genres section)
which ones are appropriate for inclusion?
i added a genre paragraph to the page last night since over the years there has been so much confussion about their genre, the table has a link that if clicked thakes u to the paragraph, instead of listing genres on the main table, they are now mention in the paragraph and other info added about their genre being so hard to pick and what they say about it. USEDfan ( talk) 17:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, according to USEDFan, ive been "vandalising" this article for "removing half a paragraph of sourced information". Let me clear up a few things: 1. I was the one who added the source in the first place, USEDFan didnt even have any proper sources to back up the genres which he/she claimed. 2. i did not just remove it, i changed it. Its called EDITING, you remove existing information and add other information which you consider to be more accurate.-- SilverOrion ( talk) 07:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
this user has changed what me, Pwange8, and FatalError worked on today, i started the paragrap, pwange8 edited it and then fatalerror edited it more and everything was fine, however silverorion kept removing half the page so i changed it back and they kept putitng it their way so i reported it and the page got locked, their edits remove half of a paragraph and put up wrong info as they say bert stated the used arent scremo when all he siad is that they dont want ot be scremo, so them removing half a paragraph of sourced info is what i thought of as vandalism so now th epage is locked on the way they want it to be and not the way that the rest of us pretty muched agreed on and loved. USEDfan ( talk) 07:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
The paragraph right now is very biased towards SilverOrion's POV that they're "not screamo". I'd appreciate it if there was more detail, like there used to be. I'm not saying that version was 100% perfect, but it was a good start, and SilverOrion changing it made it worse. I also don't like the fact that he was constantly removing the link to the band's OFFICIAL youtube channel, and masking it as a "minor edit". [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] This is definitely malicious behaviour on his part. However, I don't agree with all the edit warring. That was just silly. Both USEDfan and SilverOrion are equally responsible for getting this page locked. You'd think if not after the third round of reverts, they'd get to actually discussing after the fourth time around :| They must've done it 9 or 10 times. Now the page is locked because of this, and no improvements can be made at all. Quite sad. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 13:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Remove the first line completely; it is unnecessary, just go straight in to a description of genres like this:
The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock,(REFERENCE HERE) post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo,(REFERENCE HERE), screamo,(REFERENCE HERE) and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo.(REFERENCE HERE)
We want to establish ourselves as something brighter than just this dimly lit singled-out genre that's going to fade away in a couple years. We're just rock kids.
As for removing the YouTube links, I think generally they get removed because of copyright violations, however as this is an official site, it seems fair for it to stay. Also, here it says there is no "blanket ban" on YouTube in the external links section. Nouse4aname ( talk) 13:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
So do we all agree that the link to their youtube channel should be re-inserted? -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 16:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Since USEDFan insists on bring it up.. i thought i might point out some of the problems with it.
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 01:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
this is the paragraph created by me, pwange8, and fatalerror:
"The Used's sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifying the band's genre of music. The mix of poppy vocals and screaming have led to the band being labeled as numerous different sub genres of rock, including alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, screamo, and pop punk. The band members have said that they don't care what genre they are or what people classify them as, as long as they make good music. [8] However, Bert McCracken has said that they do not want to be labeled screamo, due to it being a "genre of music that is eating us alive right now" and because it is "going to fade away in a couple years". [9] Nonetheless, they are still often classified as such. Since the band does not say what genre they are, it appears that it will always be a disputed topic amongst fans."
and this is the current vandalized one by silverorion:
"The Used sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifiy the band's genre of music. They have been classified under many genres such as alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, punk pop, etc. When the band is asked about what genre of music they are, they never give a direct answer. Bert McCracken states that they are not screamo, commenting: "We want to establish ourselves as something brighter than just this dimly lit singled-out genre that's going to fade away in a couple years. We're just rock kids[24]"
and here are the problems with it: 1. they removed half a paragraph of sourced inforamtion. 2. they made it say that bert states the band isnt scremo when all he said was that he didnt want to be classified as scremo 3. they removed all the genre info about how the band lists themselves on myspace 4. they are removing that the band is calssified as screamo from the list of genre in the paragraph 5. they are removing the closing sentence that sums up and finishes off the paragraph USEDfan ( talk) 01:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 01:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
NONE OF WHICH SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT IT BEING SCREAMO. -- SilverOrion ( talk) 01:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,543090,00.html USEDfan ( talk) 01:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
@SilverOrion: Those Sputnik reviews are not staff reviews, so they're not reliable either. -- Pwnage8 ( talk) 13:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
this is how noused4name said it shud be:
The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock,(REFERENCE HERE) post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo,(REFERENCE HERE), screamo,(REFERENCE HERE) and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo.(REFERENCE HERE)
i think it covers both versions well and meets in the middle so me and silverorion should prob agree to this one, whats every1 think, if we could agree to this we can call and admin over to unlock the page and we can fix it. USEDfan ( talk) 01:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
this is the paragraph created by me, pwange8, and fatalerror:
"The Used's sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifying the band's genre of music. The mix of poppy vocals and screaming have led to the band being labeled as numerous different sub genres of rock, including alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, screamo, and pop punk. The band members have said that they don't care what genre they are or what people classify them as, as long as they make good music. [1] However, Bert McCracken has said that they do not want to be labeled screamo, due to it being a "genre of music that is eating us alive right now" and because it is "going to fade away in a couple years".[2] Nonetheless, they are still often classified as such. Since the band does not say what genre they are, it appears that it will always be a disputed topic amongst fans."
and this is the current vandalized one by silverorion:
"The Used sound gives fans and reviewers alike a difficult time classifiy the band's genre of music. They have been classified under many genres such as alternative rock, post-hardcore, emo, punk pop, etc. When the band is asked about what genre of music they are, they never give a direct answer. Bert McCracken states that they are not screamo, commenting: "We want to establish ourselves as something brighter than just this dimly lit singled-out genre that's going to fade away in a couple years. We're just rock kids[24]"
this is how noused4name said it shud be:
"The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock,(REFERENCE HERE) post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo,(REFERENCE HERE), screamo,(REFERENCE HERE) and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo.(REFERENCE HERE)"
i think it covers both versions well and meets in the middle so me and silverorion should prob agree to this one, whats every1 think?
USEDfan (
talk)
02:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
heres an version with some sources:
The Used have been classified under many genres, including alternative rock [13], post-hardcore,(REFERENCE HERE) emo, [14], screamo, [15] and pop punk(REFERENCE HERE). The band often evades directly answering questions about their genre, although Bert McCracken has specifically stated he does not consider the band to be screamo. [16] USEDfan ( talk) 19:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Not really that different but yeah...
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 04:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
what do u think of that? if we amke it like this we will no that no wrong or right gerne has been listed and then the arguement about what shud be listed in the opening sentence would be settled. USEDfan ( talk) 05:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
(UTC)
Can the appropriate citations be inserted into the paragraph? I have added fact tags to where I think they should go. Also, "the debates are seemingly endless" doesn't have a very encyclopedic tone. Bill ( talk| contribs) 10:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
After all this discussion, you go and change it to something you KNOW i disagree with. Fine, if you must have genres, use my original proposal
We do NOT need to add screamo into the first sentence because the the next sentence is covering the issue. DONT MAKE THIS ANY MORE DIFFICULT-- SilverOrion ( talk) 08:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
yea its very tempting for me to just change it as i please, but since im not a complete moron who goes and breaks an agreement less than a day after it was discussed, i wont. -- SilverOrion ( talk) 09:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
-- SilverOrion ( talk) 07:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I changed "Disputed" to "Rock (disputed)" in the infobox just like on Panic at the Disco's article. This will make it a bit more clear for people reading the article that have no clue about The Used. I realize "rock" is in the first sentence of the actual article, but the first place people glance is usually the infobox. -- Fatal Error 03:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Anyone have the exact article that the quote came from? It would be nice to be able to cite it and not have that ugly "citation needed" tag. -- Fatal Error 01:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)