Talk:British rock music

Punk rock
The punk rock section is totally written from an American perspective. I'm American and I know punk was more than just an underground movement in the UK. Hell, the Sex Pistols topped the charts (according to what chart you looked at that year). WesleyDodds 02:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC) Punk sucks anyways but it does deserve its credit for ruining a generation of music. Lue3378 07:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for expressing my opinion, which I know is against the wishes of the glorious rulers of Wikipedia, but punk does not suck. It was a unique form of expression, and a pleasant diversion from the overproduced stadium rock of the same era. Astonmartini 00:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, given the choice between prog and punk, I'd go for prog any day. That said, punk doesn't suck, even though I think that punk itself is a bit too ... basic ... it has spawned some good sub-genres (folk punk springs to mind) and inspired some great bands. Anyway, yes, it needs to be rewritten, but punk isn't an area I'm particularly knowledgable about. LupusCanis 10:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

And after
Shouldn't there be mention of such things as NWOBHM (the new wave of British Heavy Metal), new wave/post-punk, goth, Britpop/Britrock. Led Zep, Genesis, Queen, U2, Blur, Oasis, Radiohead all deserve mention.

But there should be no mention of the Ramones !

Yes, I think this article, unless it is just supposed to be about the original British Invasion, has no reason to stop in the late 1970s. It should be expanded to have a brief summary of every major British movement in rock music which otherwise merits its own article. The punk section is poorly written, the new wave section strangely America-centric (wasn't "pub rock" the big deal equivalent in the UK-- Elvis Costello, Joe Cocker, Graham somethingorother). Then of course a post-punk section is needed, as these bands, especially in Leeds and Manchester, were highly innovative and influential in defining alternative rock on both sides of the Atlantic, and in influencing the British rock bands of today.

-- Beardo 09:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd say that we need those ones that just link to other articles to have a summary too. LupusCanis 10:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Just a note to advise that U2 are not British (despite two of the members being from the UK). --82.2.5.153 (talk) 22:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Cycles
I was wondering about expanding the final mention of The Darkness to mention how punk looked back to early rock and roll, and was followed by the mod revival; later in the 80s, groups revisted glam; Britpop was revisting 60s music - including the mods again. Or is this more like original research ?

-- Beardo 09:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Music of the United Kingdom should not include music of Ireland as a whole. It should only include Northern Ireland. Mentions of U2 etc should be reserved for articles on Music of Ireland...

Status Quo
Seems odd to be that there is no mention one of the most sucessful British rock band of all time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chump Manbear (talk • contribs) 20:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

There not the most sucsfull british band of all time (well i hope not) But yes they deserve a mention —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.50.168.7 (talk) 10:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice POV you got there mate. According to the BBC "Status Quo have had more hit singles than any other band in UK chart history" - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/4259312.stm, so yes it is wrong that Quo don't even get a mention in this article.BoogieRock (talk) 22:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the problem is that Status Quo don't fitr neatly into any of the categories set out in this article. Maybe as the most successful rock band they should have their own section? 80.7.228.223 (talk) 19:23, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed - the biggest selling British rock band of all time after all.81.97.28.85 (talk) 19:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

What about the New Romantics of the early 80s?
Perhaps somebody who knows about this topic should add something? 83.221.82.109

Multiple issues
I have tagged this article for multiple issues. These include a complete lack of citations, outrageous POV and some fundamental errors. For example, the lead fails to do the basic job of defining what the article is about, is it British Rock and Roll as developed in the late 1950s and 1960s or everything that can be called rock produced in Britain?--Sabrebd (talk) 12:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I have tried to deal with some of these issues and expanded the article to include all the sub-genres for which I can find material to summarise and bearing in mind the points made above.--Sabrebd (talk) 20:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yikes! You've been busy...  At first sight this looks good, but peppered by a fair few highly debatable statements, and maybe omissions..  I will look through it over the next few days!  Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:44, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd appreciate it if you would, there are a lot of summaries here, so there is quite a lot taken on trust.--Sabrebd (talk) 22:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've had a quick run through, picked up a few things (Devo not British!) - will get back to it. Hopefully we can agree on most things!  I'm very impressed though.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Use of term "British Invasion"
Re-reading part of this article, I'm slightly concerned about the US-centric use of the term "British Invasion". Obviously the term was used at the time in the US, and has later been used to describe the impact of that period on music later - but within the UK the music itself was not seen at the time as an "invasion", it was simply British-based beat music or pop music which the Americans had (belatedly) started to enjoy. I'll make a few editorial changes and see how it looks. I'm not criticising the content, just the way the term "British Invasion" appears to be being used as a neutral description, when it was only seen that way by those on one side of the Atlantic. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Its a fair point. We could go over to a section on Beat music, that mentions the rise of British bands to world prominence.--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 13:48, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I realised that we would not want to duplicate the earlier section on "Beat music" - the later "invasion" aspect is worthy of its own section in my view. I've made a few changes now - what do you think?   Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Please help improve the following articles
Your help and knowledge is needed in the improvment of the following articles:


 * Music of the United Kingdom (1950s and 60s)
 * Music of the United Kingdom (1970s)
 * Music of the United Kingdom (1980s)
 * Music of the United Kingdom (1990s)
 * Music of the United Kingdom (2000s)

TheCuriousGnome (talk) 17:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Heavy Metal
How the heck can anyone say Led Zeppelin gained "little critical acclaim"? Decades after their demise they are still considered at the pinnacle of the genre. This is ludicrous.

Fmillard (talk) 05:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * In their initial days... That's true. Read biographies and books about them. The idiotic critics hated them, but with time, same idiots hailed them as one of the greatest rock bands of all time. Scieberking (talk) 06:29, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Coldplay
Are Coldplay really Britain's best example of 'alternative rock'? I get genres are subjective, but I really don't see anything alternative about them. No offence to the band, but they're too radio friendly and to be considered alternative rock in my view. Could we consider putting Radiohead or someone up there instead? Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.253.235 (talk) 19:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Are you talking about the lead montage?--  SabreBD  (talk ) 19:22, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * yep, sorry I didn't clarify 87.115.253.235 (talk)
 * I didn't come up with the montage, but I think that the rationale may be that, whatever they are now, they started off as alternative rock. Also Radiohead are represented with a picture in the main text, so I think that they probably would be a bit over-represented if they were in twice. That said, if there is clear support for a change among editors I am willing to go along with it.--  SabreBD  (talk ) 00:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on British 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561509274/glam_rock.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080605102813/http://www.havocrex.com/press/article/1/20 to http://www.havocrex.com/press/article/1/20

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:36, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

UK verus British
This just seems oddly titled. Why not refer to the common phrase of "British rock" that has been used for decades? "Rock music of the United Kingdom" just seems unwieldly and bland. --82.2.5.153 (talk) 22:30, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I just noticed the page American rock, which is not titled Rock music of the United States of America. I'd propose a name change. I'm not entirely sure how, but I will give it a go. --82.2.5.153 (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 29 August 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved to British rock music per the consensus below L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:33, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Rock music of the United Kingdom → British rock – More common and natural phrase, in common with its cousin American rock. 82.2.5.153 (talk) 22:40, 29 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Move to British rock music. Rreagan007 (talk) 01:07, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose This is a UK topic. why should UK readers have to rename their country to the US name for their people? Why should their article on their rock music be renamed to an American description of their music? It isn't known by "British Rock" in Gbooks, even in US books. In ictu oculi (talk)  07:42, 30 August 2018‎
 * You're telling me that people from the United Kingdom don't use "British" as an adjective to describe themselves? And your snide reference to Trump was unnecessary. Rreagan007 (talk) 08:16, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * What? I am British and proud. "British" is in no way a demonym created by American people. See British people.  Lazz _R  10:27, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support British rock music per consistency with other genres.  Lazz _R  10:27, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment All the other WPs appear to use "British" rather than UK, but British is more ambiguous as the UK also includes NI.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 07:55, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. Rock music in Ireland includes references to Northern Irish musicians such as Van Morrison.  Although "British" is widely used (not only in the US) as the demonym for all people in the UK, its use to cover Northern Ireland is not uncontroversial.  Personally I have no issue with there being overlap between the "British" and "Irish" articles in relation to the N Ireland situation - many articles about Ireland cover the whole island, not just the Republic.  A further thought is that, to British ears, "British rock music" seems much more appropriate and informative than "British rock".    Unlike, say, "jazz" or "blues", the word "rock" has many meanings.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:50, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Easily ticks every box in the WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. Don't need six words if the same can be conveyed in two words without any loss in meaning. As for "British rock" vs "British rock music", music seems kind of redundant. See for example British rock and roll, British folk rock, British soul, British jazz, British blues, and British hip hop. Even if rock has many meanings, I don't see how British rock can't convey whatever meaning or info that British rock music encompasses. Spellcast (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * See Geology of Great Britain. As I said, the words "jazz" and "blues" clearly refer to music genres, as do "hip hop" and "folk rock", and in context "British soul" would be a term only used in relation to music.  More seriously, WP:COMMONNAME in Britain (WP:BRITENG) would, I believe, be "British rock music" not "British rock".  Just saying "rock" sounds American to me, not British.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:30, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Eh, not saying you're wrong but unless there's evidence, I'm kind of sceptical that "British rock music" vs "British rock" is a British vs American English variation. I don't know if something like that can be proven except through anecdotal evidence but I'll have a go. Perhaps the best way would be to look at how British sources and authors treat the term. The rock music article on Encyclopedia Britannica only has rock in bold. The Cambridge Companion to Pop and Rock has a section on defining just "rock". Maybe even the book title itself supports my point, in which case another example would be Hamburg: The Cradle of British Rock by Alan Clayson. As for the geology article, I highly doubt the music genre easily gets confused with it despite how vague and ambiguous British rock may sound. If it did, we should probably find at least a couple of links to British rock to have been intended for a geology topic. But there's literally zero examples out of the ~200 article mainspace links where that's the case as far as I can see. Spellcast (talk) 23:08, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Or take The Sociology of Rock by Simon Frith. And in Performing Rites: On the Value of Popular Music by the same author, every instance of the term "British rock" isn't followed by music (same with the Cambridge Companion). Now that doesn't prove anything. It could simply have been redundant to use that term given that the context clearly refers to the genre. But my point is that given all this info, it's not immediately obvious (indeed perhaps not even true at all) that British rock music is the correct BritEng variation. Again I could be wrong but it's not clear there's a WP:Engvar issue. Spellcast (talk) 00:31, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And looking at the article's history, British rock was the title since 2004 until it was moved to the current title in 2016, citing WP:NCCST. However, that guideline has many common sense exceptions, and I'd say this is one of them. So yeah, support move back to British rock. Spellcast (talk) 19:42, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Muse
The article only mentions Muse in passing in the Garage rock/Post-punk revival section. I think this is wholly unfitting for Muse who are much more of a neo-prog or nu-prog band than garage or post-punk. – Dyolf87 (talk) 12:11, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

A group from England mid 60s called the Robin hood's played in Chicago o rush street for awhile
A group from England called the Robin hood's played on rush street for a while 2601:243:E80:2690:D870:FCEA:73D0:4D98 (talk) 18:46, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Have women been erased from the history of British rock?
Perhaps someone can add some information (and photos) regarding the women of British rock - throughout it Opixel (talk) 02:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC)