Talk:List of musicians in the second wave of punk rock

Deleting bands
67.38.161.126, any chance you could quit deleting bands without discussing them here first? -- Zoe


 * I deleted all bands without Wikipedia articles. There's no point of just listing band names if people can't click on them to find information about them.Spylab 12:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Third Wave punk?
Shouldn't Sum 41, The Ataris, AFI, Alkaline Trio, Box Car Racer, Good Charlotte, Green Day, Long Beach Dub Allstars, New Found Glory, The Offspring et al. be in a list of third wave punk musicians? -- Jimregan


 * Probably, but for the sake of simplicity I'd vote to keep them as 'second wave' as in, they wern't part of the original 'wave' of 'punk' bands (e, Pistols, Clash, Damned, etc)... I think this is probably good enough as far as these lists go, otherwise we'll end up with no end of seperate pages for each 'wave' of punk with endless arguements over who should be in what wave... Just my thoughts, anyway... quercus robur 22:45 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * Well, I bring this up, because AFAIR when Green Day's Dookie and The Offspring's Smash came out, they were referred to as the third wave. I suppose, if it's wide spread enough, it's appropriate to have a third wave page, otherwise it's not. -- Jimregan 06:04 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * I'm a little late to the conversation, but I agree that the likes of Green Day, the Offspring, and Blink-182 belong in the Third Wave group. Any old school punker scoffs at these pogo-stickers. vudu 01:24, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * There aren't enough "third-wave" punk bands to justify making a whole list of them. I see some of the "third wave" bands have been put in this list already, anyway. --Guess Who 00:44, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm another person chiming in for the creation of a 'third wave' list (and I think there are enough bands to warrant it). To stop arguments a braver person than me should come up with a year at which point a band becomes 'third wave'. MagicBez 00:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I disagree with the creation of a Third Wave of Punk list. The term third wave punk has never been used in widespread way. The only music genre I can think of that people have used the term third wave with is ska. Any attempt to split punk rock into several waves would be arbitrary and not very meaningful.Spylab 12:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Spylab

I think it's pretty obvious that the third wave came in the wake of Bad Religion's album Suffer, which completely reinvigorated the West Coast punk scene and set the stage for Green Day, Rancid, Offspring, NOFX, and others that have defined the third wave... All those bands were in their formative stages when Suffer was released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.102.97.164 (talk) 02:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

The main article on punk music refers to the third wave as the "revival". The third wave "revival" bands should be removed from the second wave page to reflect this distinction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.230.153.212 (talk) 13:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The main article considers the second wave to begin in roughly 1977, when punk emerged from London and New York to reach a wider underground audience. Everything after that is broken into numerous sub-movements. I think it's safe to say that -- because every scene was its own fragmented, discontinuous organism -- sorting the history of punk into tidy little categories is impossible. There were few singularly pivotal moments by which those divisions could be drawn. There's also a problem with many of the better-known bands on this list in that they've been around for as much as 20 years and have gone through several different sounds, so it doesn't make sense to pigeonhole them into these categories. Besides, punk bands are generally classified more by their style and place of origin than by their era. I think this list should be nominated for deletion.Ibadibam (talk) 19:14, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Dead Kennedys
Why are the Dead Kennedys on this list? They formed in 1978, so surely are part of the first wave, not second wave (by the definition used on this page). I'd also question how the Pixies can in any way be considered a punk band, when they're closer to the pop than punk side of rock (that's not a criticism, I love the Pixies!) ShaneKing 07:20, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I agree. I don't really like this list because it's so loosely defined. You've got the Circle Jerks (formed in 1979) in the same "wave" as Rancid (formed in 1991). Seems weird to me. Deepfryer99 (talk) 16:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Alphabetization
I fixed many of the links and decided to list bands with their full names in alphabetical order (i.e. adding the at beginning of "The Vandals"). Also, where were you guys on the Queers and Screeching Weasel?--TheGrza 03:29, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * When you alphabetise a list of musicians you really shouldn't put all the bands whose names begin with 'the' under the 'T' section. I'm pretty sure that's a generally recognised rule for these things. The Vandals should be in the 'V' section. MagicBez 00:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Blink 182
This list is a complete joke, bands that have nothing to do with each other are stuffed into the same "wave" Turbonegro aren't related to bands like Blink 182 in anyway, and Blink 182 don't belong in any "wave" of punk rock lists. - Deathrocker 00:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Green Day
Sometimes they are punk, sometimes there not. Do they deserve to be second wave?--Nimrod1234 13:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Green Day fit into the pop punk genre for sure. Someone should make a final decision about whether they belong on this page, because having them added and deleted almost every day (mostly by anonymous users with no explanation) is rediculous. Spylab 18:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab
 * I think that a new book by Mojo called "Punk: the Whole Story" having a chapter on Green Day after the chapter on Black Flag is rationale enough. WesleyDodds 14:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)