Talk:Folk music

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleFolk music was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
January 25, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted


I can see that there was a pretty extensive cleanup of this article a few years ago and it seems to be organized pretty well. However, from the first sentence of the lede, it sounds like a good candidate opportunity for WP:CONSPLIT. "Contemporary folk music," as the section is currently called, really seems to be about the folk music genre (and it's successors) that arose in the 1960s and was derived from a specific folk tradition. It is separate from the traditional and largely non-commercial music that makes up the other folk music topic, and it does not include contemporary music of different folk traditions. To me, the general difference is that "contemporary folk music" is a genre with a specific sound while traditional folk music is a category that encompasses many genres and is defined more by its history. They're different concepts and deserve separate articles. —Ost (talk) 14:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree. I think that contemporary folk music is a rather distinct topic from traditional folk music. I Am A Sandwich (talk) 04:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree too. I see 'contemporary folk music' as modern music, that seeks to imitate traditional folk music by using traditional instruments and singing in an traditional fashion, whether without any modern elements as I think is often the case in psychadelic folk , or by also adding some modern elements as 'folk punk' or 'folk rock'. <br\> Split the article! CN1 (talk) 23:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Agree as well. There is an awkwardness here in trying to blend the two. As someone who remembers vividly the raging, public, and high-profile controversies regarding "authenticity" in folk music - controversy not really touched on in any detail here - I have to shake my head ruefully when I see record companies, Grammys, and music journalists refer to music as "folk" when it is simply acoustic, or primarily acoustic. The term "folk music" is academic in origin (as the article points out, from 19th century Germany), and in most academic departments "folk" still means primarily traditional. Hence, the split would make sense in clarifying the very different rubrics that govern the two styles. Sensei48 (talk) 02:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Agree, PROVIDED it be called 'Traditional folk music' instead with appropriate redirects and such, as per listed above (the reasoning, that is). Aleccat 02:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleccat (talkcontribs)

The split was done in 2014, albeit without the renaming. North8000 (talk) 18:13, 9 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Although I think that the renaming of this half to "Traditional folk music" is a good idea. But we should go slow on this. This area has had low participation and many "false starts" have been made moving and renaming etc. North8000 (talk) 14:14, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So adding specifics, wait until April 2017 for discussions and then convert "Folk Music" to a disambig page, and change the name of this article to "Traditional Folk Music".
Make that to "Traditional folk music"North8000 (talk) 15:23, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Global tags?[edit]

An individual put a large amount of section tags and three global tags on at once. This is a large article built by many editors with many references. I don't think that the global tags are useful or necessary. Could anyone with specific concerns make them know and then I plan to wait 1-2 months and take off the global tags. North8000 (talk) 15:26, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I support this and think that we should remove immediately the tags about "personal essay" - which is nonsense - and OR. Absent extended and specific discussion on Talk, these tags are POV and unproductive at the very least. More citations are always welcome in any good article and some other issues still need to be addressed, but the aforementioned two tags should de deleted right away. Sensei48 (talk) 08:42, 23 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Folk music of all cultures[edit]

Right now, this article mostly takes a global view, especially the first half or so. That is, it avoids defining the topic by reference to English-language folk music. Later sub-sections are a bit more dominated by English-language coverage.
So this is just to say, let's all keep ultra-aware to maintain (and extend) this commendable neutrality and balance. Onanoff (talk) 13:07, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Traditional music, Folk music and Ethnic music[edit]

Traditional music and Folk music are synonyms or different concepts? I think Folk music = (Traditional music + Contemporary folk music) = Ethnic music = National music. I propose to discuss. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 08:16, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a huge question. In short, "folk music" is an English term that can be seen as having two different but related meanings. My approach was to in essentially divide the article into two accordingly, but still keep them in the same article due to overlap. While I was gone for a while, somebody took the "contemporary folk music" half of the article and moved it to a new separate article by that name. I wouldn't have done that, but I have no significant objection to it. So in essence we have two top (broadest) level folk music articles.
That still leaves open the question of "what is folk music" under both. There is no tidy/ consistent answer, but the beginnings of each article try to cover that. And in this article that also means trying to cover how national music and ethnic music relate to that. Further discussions on this would be both fun and welcome. North8000 (talk) 14:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Russian academic sources say: Traditional folk music is oral folk art. The performance is intended for oneself or in accordance with the rite. Contemporary folk music is author's music or arrangement. The performance is intended for the listener. This is usually commercial music. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 16:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Structural overview[edit]

Recapping and expanding on the above. In short, "folk music" is an English term that can be seen as having two different but related meanings. My approach was to in essentially divide the article into two halves accordingly, but still keep them in the same article due to overlap. While I was gone from Wikipedia for a while, somebody took the "contemporary folk music" half of the article and moved it to a new separate article by that name. I wouldn't have done that, but I have no significant objection to it and it did help regarding article length. So, as a result, we have an unusual structure. The lead of this article covers both. Then the body covers the Traditional folk music half of the topic and the Contemporary folk music article covers the other half of the topic. So under the current structure Contemporary folk music needs to be strongly mentioned/ linked to in this article. I think that the only other viable alternative is to combine the two back into this article. All other alternatives come out to not even having an article named Folk Music which IMO is not viable since the overwhelmingly common term is Folk music and in the eyes of 95% of all English-speaking readers it is a single topic/subject. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Folk Music genres[edit]

I am trying to fit all genres of Folk music on here. I do not want to be interrupted again. May the next person who takes away my edits be blocked for disruptive editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:C201:C640:84CB:6F5F:8B7F:3CE3 (talkcontribs)

Perhaps you will soon realize that multiple people here oppose your effort to drop excessive navboxes at the bottom of the page. I removed the ones at Rock music that were serving as your inspiration, and removed your work at Electronic music.
If something is important to folk music it will be described in prose in the article body. Readers don't need a hundred more links at the bottom. It's clutter, confusing, unhelpful. Binksternet (talk) 19:21, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What's unhelpful is your constant removal of resources. I'm pretty sure it was agreed a long time ago that the Rock music would have all its subgenres in a navigation box.
I agree with the removal and with Binksternet's rationale for doing so. Plus merely "related" is far too low of a bar to include in this article. North8000 (talk) 21:33, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Won't you at least listen to me about Rock music? I actually read the Talk page for the template, and it was outright said that putting all subgenres under the Rock template would make the template too big to manage. Is there anything we can do about this issue?
I tried fixing your indent but you reverted which is fine. Now with your indent it is a question which you asked me. Of the areas that you discussed, my only involvement is at the Folk music article. So I'm not involved with whatever you are asking me about.North8000 (talk) 18:19, 22 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for comment[edit]

There is an RfC ongoing about a topic that contributors to this article may be interested in. It can be found here. JimKaatFan (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deletion of section(s)?[edit]

As I go through this article, I see that there are sections without due importance. The first is "First British Folk Revival." Why must it have a separate subsection, when the section above it talks about all revivals? Besides, the references are scarce, and if you were to talk about one in specific it would more than likely be 1940's onward due to it receiving way more coverage. Also, another thing I wish to mention is electronic instruments in folk music. It only makes the article longer (which it already is) without providing real value, in my opinion.-- • Apollo468•  20:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't have a strong opinion either way on those and seeing the excellent work that you've been doing, I'd go along with the actions implied in your post. I do advocate strong "in practice" coverage and so would like strong coverage of folk music festivals that significantly include traditional folk music.North8000 (talk) 01:22, 14 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@North8000 Alright, thank you for your comment. I'm going to go ahead and delete the subsections mentioned tomorrow since it is rather late. I'll continue adding citations to this article - currently on Sri Lanka under Asia. When I'm done, I will try and attempt to help with that and expand the folk music festivals. Not a writer personally, but some of the sentences in this are rather choppy. Cheers,-- • Apollo468•  03:51, 14 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]