Jump to content

Talk:Polysics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discography

[edit]

It's a mess and hard to read.

About the trivia

[edit]

Any source for the Mark Mothersbaugh bit?--Aresef 05:40, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Mark and Jerry said some very cool things, praising the Polysics highly. Mark told Hiro that he had used the Polysics CD on his office phone system, forcing the people on hold to hear it. Mark then said that it was Devo’s goal to stay home and mow the lawn, and Jerry agreed, saying they were glad a band had finally come along to carry on the Devo tradition, so they more or less declared the event a "passing of the torch."" [1] Felixir 06:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, very cool.--Aresef 16:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

Can we please stop referring to every single new band on wikipedia as part of the post-punk revival? Just because these guys are part of the same time frame and share the same guitar sound, I think it's a pretty far stretch to call them post-punk revivalists, especially since they don't share the same influences or developmental cycles as their British/American counterparts. I think I even saw DFA1979 get called Post-Punk Revivalists. It's fucking terrible. Whoever's doing it is really lowering the standards of wiki, even if I am myself by swearing.

I'm just sick of seeing bands get lumped into such a boxy, commercial genre, when they share nothing in common with that scene, but people don't know what else to call them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.131.209.213 (talk) 22:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Might I suggest that new wave is added as a genre of theirs? it seems quite obvious to me, but I want to check the general feeling of this round here before making any changes Ukatoton 19:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New wave is definitely more appropriate than post punk revival. 124.187.49.198 16:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)Jack[reply]

I went ahead and made the change(s). -- magetoo 23:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

[edit]

Can anyone find a non copyrighted modern picture of them? The one picture in the article looks kind of old.Jasontheperson 19:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Polysics = Plural?

[edit]

Here is a copy of the current revision that I encountered.

Polysics (or POLYSICS) are a Japanese new wave/Rock band from Tokyo, who personally dub their unique style as "technicolor pogo punk".

Is Polysics not singular? I'm editing this one. --Chininazu12 13:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kayo as a Past Member?

[edit]

There's an announcement on their official website that she'd be 'graduating' after the BUDOKAN or Die concert. The concert was Sunday, so shouldn't she be moved to past members? JohnMLTX (talk) 02:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The name of their 2012 album is "Weeeeeeeeee!!!". Seriously.

[edit]

Several editors and cluebot have reverted attempts to add Polysics' latest album, which is titled "Weeeeeeeeee!!!". This is entirely understandable, since this is such a common form of vandalism, but this really is the name of the album. See[2], [3] and [4].Grayfell (talk) 10:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Polysics. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 02:06, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]