Talk:Dark rock

Import

This article is notable, but based on the German one; someone should import the German article’s version history. --217/83 00:15, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if its technically necessary, as long as there is a link to the German one on the page... The Steve  00:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know this is a copyright violation or something like that. When a German article is based on an English one, the latter’s version history must be imported. --217/83 00:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I know that the license specifically accepts a "shortened" version of the majority of the editors on the article, and that this can be linked in some way. So your first note up there saying that its based on the German one might satisfy the copyright. However IANAL.  The Steve  00:51, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, here it is: "Where such credit is commonly given through page histories (such as Wikimedia-internal copying), it is sufficient to give attribution in the edit summary, which is recorded in the page history, when importing the text." I have put an attribution in the edit summaries, which I admit I am terribly lax with... The Steve 

There's now a cite to the Encyclopedia of Heavy Metal, page 185. Can we have a direct quote please (on the talk page if nothing else)? The cite is being used to back up the creation by one band of a new genre, for the record, so it needs to be substantial. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:12, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. Now a cite to CMJ, but again no quote, author, link, nothing. If you can't find some English-language, web-friendly reliable sources, I'm beginning to think this whole thing might be made up. There must be sources, surely! Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

This is not made up, and if Thesteve would quote from Zillo, Orkus or such magazines, these would be relevant to this project as well. Thesteve and I could still provide English translations if needed, --217/83 07:35, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'm game. What articles in those magazines are about the dark rock genre? Not interviews with bands claiming to be "dark rock". It needs substantial coverage of its own, as a genre. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 08:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I keep forgetting how very internet-centric and real source-ignorant wikipedia tends to be... Oh, it goes on to say "the influence they had on other bands in their original genre was profound enough for them to retain a sizable portion of their fan base."  The Steve  03:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

But that says nothing about the "dark rock" genre... Blackmetalbaz (talk) 08:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, looking again at quote now present in the source. The statement "moving away from heavy metal and creating a new genre, dark rock" is in no way whatsoever backed up by reference 1, which simply states that PL prefer to refer to their music as "dark rock" - which indicates nothing about a new subgenre, simply that they play rock music that happens to be somewhat "dark". We have the same situation that we had with "dark metal". Blackmetalbaz (talk) 08:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

It says that they moved away from heavy metal and that they went to a new "almost pure goth" genre that *they call* dark rock. So no, it doesn't come out and say that Dark Rock is a subgenre, but it certainly backs it up. If you consider "Dark Rock" to be a genre (as many magazines do, shown in the other quotes), then this is clear. If you consider "Dark Rock" to *not* be a genre (ignoring those same magazines Zillo, Orkus, et al) then it only says that that is what the band call their new "gothy" genre. I don't know how much weight you'd put in this, but Zillo magazine has a Dark rock section in *every* issue, so they certainly consider it a valid sub-genre.  The Steve  04:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Major overhaul

This article is all over the place, I don't know where to begin. It states alternative rock as it's origins without once mentioning an alternative rock band as a musical or stylistic protagonist. Dark rock's has far more obvios roots in gothic rock and gothic metal than alternative rock. Alternative rock as it stands is just as broad, if not a broader term, than dark rock. Using a broad term to describe the origins of a broad term is just unnecessary at this point given that the term "dark rock" is far too new to be directly sourced.

Dark rock, again, has more direct ties to gothic rock and gothic metal. Everything from lyrical themes to aesthetic and imagery is without question directly rooted in gothic rock and gothic metal.

Most of the information pertaining to the origins of “dark rock” lack coherency. In the stylistic origins section, gothic rock, alternative rock, and German rock are listed. Yet the article goes on to cite Paradise Lost as the creators of “dark rock”, dismissing the fact that Paradise Lost was neither gothic rock or alternative rock; nor where they from Germany.

"In the second half of the 1990s, groups like Secret Discovery and Paradise Lost expanded their repertoire with modern elements."

Modern elements? What does that mean? This is written without elaborating on what “modern elements” is supposed to accompany.

"In Finland, a dark rock style was developed by such bands as HIM and The 69 Eyes".

Well which is it then? HIM has been around since 1991; making essentially the same style of music since 1991 when their earliest demo tapes where recorded. Now if the article considers HIM to be one of the pioneers of “dark rock”, wouldn’t that make them the originators and not Paradise Lost or Secret Discovery?

HIM could not have been responsible for helping develop a style of music in the late 90’s that they have been playing since the early 90’s. HIM’s lyrical themes and overall aesthetic has maintained a sense of consistency since day one; which is, by broad definition, “dark rock”.

Almost everything in the "history" section of the article is completely contradicted in the "List of dark rock bands" section, by listing bands such as "Girls Against Boys" and "Three Days Grace". The Three Days Grace source isn’t even pertaining to Three Days Grace, it mentions something about Nickleback, and it is not even a link. Three Days Grace is post-grunge which, by definition, has absolutely nothing to do with "dark rock".

The Girls Against Boys source it just rubbish…dark rock is rooted in gothic rock and gothic metal, not indie rock and post-hardcore. And the article does not refer to Girls Against Boys as “dark rock” per se. They are referring to them very casually as “Ultra-cool dark rock” which should hardly be taken as a serious reference.

I am all for "dark rock" finally recieving it's own page, and this could be a really interesting article if researched, written, and presented properly. It would at least relieve some genre debate as well as settle a few groups into a broad category; groups such as HIM for instance, who have been the victims of a game of hot potato between the goth and metal subcultures for as long as I can recall.

But as the article stands, no.

- Sonofdoom

Feel free to change as needed. I started this as a simple translation of the German article, but then it was nominated for Afd, and I spent some time looking for references, which I found in abundance, but few in-depth ones. I also had to leave some claims out, such as the one stating that the term was first used in 1997, which was disproven by the most cursory search. So you are correct, the sources are not well-integrated in the article, and it's difficult to determine if "dark rock" in a given source refers to an actual genre or is an adjective for rock. It is clear to me that dark rock is a genre, and that HIM is widely considered one of the pioneers.  The Steve  04:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

This article is a neologism and should be deleted Syxxpackid420 (talk) 19:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Wrong. --217/83 19:28, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Haha no, he's right. But all musical genres are neologisms. Yes, that's right, rock and roll was a made-up neologism in 1940 or so, which is pretty recent for the history of the English language. Unfortunately for Syxxpack, enough people have written about dark rock in reliable sources to make it a notable neologism, so it shouldn't be deleted, despite being a brand new phrase.  The Steve  08:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Good reply. --217/83 12:25, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dark rock. 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/20071112062744/http://www.pooltrax.com:80/cdtipp/2007/09/him_venus_doom.html to http://www.pooltrax.com/cdtipp/2007/09/him_venus_doom.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 23:33, 6 December 2016 (UTC)