Talk:Toronto goth scene

goth scene or goth subculture

 * Keep providing reliable sources if you can and I'll format them and try to eliminate any original research. If kept, this should be renamed Goth subculture in Toronto. If deleted, Culture in Toronto can have a shortened summary version. –Pomte 02:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You know what, I have no clue as to the goth scene in this city, so all I can do is go by these sources. (I live in the suburbs so I only see them when I'm downtown for a concert that attracts goths and I'm like, where do they pop up from? I've been to Funhaus but only when they play rock/metal.) –Pomte 02:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe the article should be named goth SCENE. A subculture and a scene are not the same thing. The majority of people in the goth scene are not involved in the goth subculture. They call it the goth scene but dont call themselves goths.TheDarknessVisible 17:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * This is the point why we call this youth and club scene as "Dark Scene" or "Dark Culture" in Europe. The Goth subculture is only a part of the "dark scene". --~Menorrhea 16:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * There is nothing called the dark scene in toronto. Most goths here refer to what you have in gemany as "the german goth scene". They are accustomed to the goth scene being populated by mostly non-goths. Since goths consider goth to be a superior and more beautiful subculture and they consider themselves the centre of attention, they call it the goth scene. And so does the mainstream media.TheDarknessVisible 18:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

social groups
no additional details about social groups can really be included in a wiki article unless they are published by independant media sources. Since groups naturally try to attract members I think wiki editors will object (probably with good cause) to relying on the groups website to actually provide unbiased information. perhaps the date established and date dissolved is appropriate. or even the current president or person in charge. I'm not sure. I want to leave out toronto goth scene trivia, gossip etc. There are editors who want this article itself deleted entirely.TheDarknessVisible 07:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Are you sure it is industrial bands should be listed here? This implies that they are under only the goth scene, but not necessarily, right? –Pomte 07:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Well it doesn't really say that. I think it would unfair for the reader to assume that participation in 1 scene precludes participation in another. With that said, the MattD source referred to Goth becomming, 'Goth-Industrial' and then talked about the influence of an industrial band called Skinny Puppy on the goth scene. most of the bands that laypeople call goth these days (not knowing what goth is) are technically industrial music. and sanctuary billed itself as a goth-industrial club.

If there is an independant industrial scene (there isn't to my knowledge, but just hypothetically). Then there is nothing here that prevents a seperate article from also listing industrial bands.

If there is enough information on industrial to justify a split, that will make itself clearer in time. I've asked some people to try to dig up sources. but I think the 2 will stay merged because they involve the same actors, the same clubs, a shared history,its all in the same queen street west area.. etc, and continue to be joined. 208.68.93.90 01:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

present day uncertainty
many facts about goth in the present day are not reported by reliable independant sources. consequently what was verifiable pre columbine, is no longer verifiable.

I think it is safe to use the language "it is not clear whether XXX is more, less or the same today".. or "it is not clear whether XXX is still true after YYY date".

this reads like original research but I think it should not be called original research when you are in effect insuring that the sources not given undue weight. it is merely restoring neutrality.

I am not sure what the wiki rule is, but I would not want someone to get the wrong idea of present day because they assume some information from 1999 must still be true. TheDarknessVisible 07:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * As long as it is clear that it is talking about how things were back then, no one should take that to imply this is how things are today. I agree with your sentiment: if there is a lack of reliable sources, then it is unclear. –Pomte 07:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Needs a general edit for style
I don't usually mess with attribution arguments, so I'm not getting into that. I think this article has a lot of good and interesting content, and I don't think it should be deleted.

However, in stylistic terms, it's a mess. There are some misspellings, and punctuation is all over the place - many unnecessary commas, some missing necessary commas, etc.

I don't have time to edit it right now, and I don't know if I'll remember to come back and edit it when I do have time, but I wanted to note that someone should do it when they can.

4.131.33.246 11:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Gothic architecture vs gothic architectural characteristics
For the unregistered smartass from ip 70.53.131.167 who wants to point out that Old City hall is not gothic architecture by using clever witicisms and vulgar language in the actual article itself: the section uses the term "gothic architectural characteristics" for a reason. You aren't the only person who knows what gothic architecture is. A grotesque is an architectural characteristic, and it is a gothic one. The section does not claim any of the buildings listed are examples of gothic architecture; it claims they have architectural characteristics which are gothic. TheDarknessVisible 17:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Are they really relevant to the goth scene though? –Pomte 05:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

"What is Goth" by voltaire goes into it in fairly extensive detail on gothic architecture. So I would say that shows the relevance. From my own personal experience I will say I've discussed gothic architecture with other goths on multiple occassions and gone looking for it before there was a wiki. so my own anecdote is not reliable for wiki. But voltaire is. I'd go further and say graveyards are part of the goth scene. Kilpatric devotes 30 pages to the subject in The Goth Bible. but I've been unable to find PD photo's of the important crypts in toronto. The Goth Bible even has a 1/2 page write up on the Massey Crypt in TO. and issue 21 of Gothic Beauty has an article on european graveyards.. (which may even be a regular column.. I'm not sure right now. but goths do discuss graveyards. perhaps its all just a bonding ritual... but it exists.. basketball fans generally dont do it. its a goth thing. and every goth knows about the catacombs of paris. (anyway its not a major part of the article.. and I'm the first person to agree that I would rather have pictures of goths than buildings... finding PD pics is hard and no one seems to want to be famous)TheDarknessVisible 09:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Aren't you a goth? Just take a picture of yourself standing in a graveyard, and go take pictures on club nights. –Pomte 22:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's the same in Germany. The early Goths (called "Grufties") were cemetary freaks, because a cemetary (and old buildings) symbolizes death and decay. But in Europe, there was no direct relation to the gothic architecture. It was a dark medieval epoch and attractive to the gothic subculture, nothing more. Later in the 90s, the gothic subculture was associated with the gothic architecture, because both things use the term "gothic". It's a mis-interpretation of the 90s. The same thing with Gothic Lolita and others... they use the term Gothi(ic) but they have nothing to do with the gothic subculture. The term Gothic came from a music style of post-punk music. --~Menorrhea 23:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Freaks
How is the designation "freaks" notable? It's not exclusive to the region during the specified time period.Theplanetsaturn 05:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, this does not seem notable. And the sources linked do not really seem to support the terminolgy used as specific to the region or really, give any reason why Toronto should have it's own article about the subculture.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 22:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Because the Goth subculture article is full of gaps. The half Goth article deals with an irrelevant school shooter, while the Goth history is absolutely gappy. The Goth subculture developed mainly in the big cities Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, Toronto and Québec etc. In other regions of North America there was no Goth subculture until the 1990s (or until today?). And yes, the term "freak" seems to be a regional peculiarity. In Europe/Germany we never did use this term. We used the term "waver". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.24.103 (talk) 15:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * While it may not have been used in Europe, "freak" is a generic term used to describe non-conformist sub cultures in many regions. The point is, it's not exclusive to Toronto and does not appear notable to the goth scene in this location. The goth article may be full of gaps. But that doesn't really make this article notable. It just means that the goth subculture article needs work.Theplanetsaturn (talk) 21:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * While freak may be a generic term, there are several details specific to Toronto in this article. Feel free to nominate for deletion. –Pomte 21:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

the main goth subculture article includes some vague statement about "subcultural boundaries" or some such, with no specifics, and no specifics are possible precisely because they VARY from local to local in unique ways and vary over time and the goth subculture article tries too hard to be scene agnostic. to give vague reports, generally applicable over many scenes. And yet, it focuses explicitly on 2 scene. The USA, and the UK. Toronto is part of NEITHER. Nancy Kilpatrick confirms the local nature of goth scenes in her book. And touches on some specific locals (one being TORONTO.). Paul Hodgkinson also states that he suspects this is true and he is an anthropologist, and he makes clear he is talking about UK goth subculture in the late 90s. No where does paul hodgkinson claim his book is about goth all over the world. And every essay in the Goth: Undead Subculture Book is very clear to indicate WHERE and WHEN it is talking about. Canoe media was inside the club (Neutral) a couple of months back making a documentary.. why bother making a documentary for mainstream network television if it isn't notable. If anyone has anthropological evidence that all scenes called "goth" are indistinguishable from one another by people of reasonable knowledge of anthropology or music or fashion or anything related, they should bring it forward. As for Toronto, this article includes plenty of details which are SPECIFIC to "toronto goth scene". Details noted by independant media outside of it. dozens of sources. I have personally been to multiple goth scenes, and talked with many participants from many more, and the first subject that is ALWAYS discussed is the DIFFERENCES. This argument is getting old. TheDarknessVisible (talk) 11:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Morpheus Black
recently a user using the name mblack added some unverifiable information about morpheus black. If mblack has any links to reliable independant sources of information which may include reference to morpheus being dubbed the "king" or some other title of goth in Toronto, please post a link to it here, and an independent editor can use that to improve this article. I invite mblack to continue to improve the article in other ways.. for example.. the sentence which referred to Toronto Gothic Society was in fact erroneous... The Vampire Book in fact does refer to The Gothic Society of Canada, and not "Toronto Gothic Society". Information which deals only with morpheuses relationship with the gothic society, or morpheuses relationship to other entities outside of toronto, may not be relevant in this article. In order to insure objectivity, and a neutral POV, I would leave any such edits about morpheus to someone who isn't morpheus or someone close to him. I will point out that the article's failure to include any reference to Morpheus being dubbed father/king/whatever of goth in toronto is most likely due to the fact that none of the sources of information cited in this article state that such a thing is took place. IT is probable that additional sources of information exist out there and I hope editors will bring it forward. I wrote this comment to explain my undo edits, on some of mblack's good faith edits. TheDarknessVisible (talk) 11:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

post punk/punk bands
it seems to me that we need to start a section for punk bands, this was omitted although a few of the goth bands would be more accurately classified as punk. TheDarknessVisible (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

pages field vs. page field
There is a noticeable issue with page referencing in the article. For a page range, the pages field is correct and pp. is produced. To reference a single page only, it is the page field which should be used, and not pages. Varlaam (talk) 17:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC) (Hogtown)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Toronto goth scene. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061125013145/http://www.toronto-goth.com/archives/2001-05-15.shtml to http://www.toronto-goth.com/archives/2001-05-15.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)