Talk:Breakbeat hardcore

Small re-write

Have attempted a small re-write of this, attempting to keep it very concise and short, using the Reynolds refs where possible plus refs that relate to all of the notable releases mentioned here plus more. It had over time mutated somewhat.

A quick note: Breakbeat hardcore (or UK hardcore) has its own UK lineage. It is untrue as one previous talk comment in the archive asserted, to say that breakbeat hardcore originated from European Hardcore techno. Of course, Belgian new beat had a big influence on the sound over a 12-18 month period (e.g Cubic 22 - Night In Motion, Senses - Destroyer), as did Beltram - Mentasm obviously (seen as a Belgian rave tune although Beltram being from the US). But breakbeat hardcore owed as much to both the 1989-1990 UK bleep scene just before it (LFO - LFO, Nightmares on Wax - Aftermath, Unique 3 - The Theme) and hip-house breakbeat/house experimentations (Blapps Posse - Bus It, Shut Up and Dance - 5 6 7 8, 4 Hero - Mr Kirk Nightmare) - the latter in some cases being dubbed Hardcore House and being very much from a hip hop/house lineage rather than any Euro hardcore sound.

I also had pondered collapsing Breakbeat hardcore and Darkcore into a single article with sections, also including Hardcore jungle, as that period of 91-93 was so interwoven. Have decided to keep as is for now. Thanks Altlondon (talk) 18:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

List of examples

Hi Binksternet, I notice you removed the list of examples, with a short explanation in the edit summary, an edit you attempted a couple of months ago but every time you have been reverted by 77.86.103.78 or Objectivecontents. Could you explain in a little more detail the reason for removal? I'm on the fence about the usefulness of a (as you point out, contextless) list, I can probably be persuaded one way or the other with a some more detail. Hoping we can reach an easy consensus. Thanks! Cambial — foliar❧ 23:08, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

The removal of examples certainly falls under WP:INDISCRIMINATE, which says not every fact is worthy of inclusion.

Beyond that, my edit summary said, "Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music#Lists says music genre articles should not have lists... Any important song in the list may be described in prose to give context." The specific MOS page says "Music genre articles should not contain lists of performers," which I extrapolated to include lists of songs. The idea, I think, is that the page should not contain lengthy lists of any sort. Rather, the page should describe the genre and its most important elements which may include record labels, producers, venues, festivals, artists, songs, albums, whatever. These elements should be shown to be important to the genre, supported by cites. A bare list of stuff is never good for our readers. Binksternet (talk) 23:58, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

My understanding from a discussion with another editor some time ago was that such a section was not innappropriate to be here, providing the artist and/or song demonstrated WP:Notability (i.e. having an article). The song that @Cambial Yellowing is insistent on repeatedly adding (2 Kilos) has neither (merely a reference), and as good a tune it is its not entirely representative of the genre either (breakbeat acid). Whilst those others listed in the section are representative and have notability. It is @Cambial Yellowing that initiated this disputed edit.

Notability appears about the best control for what gets added to such a section (list), otherwise, if it's simply reliant on references alone, where do you draw the line? At least a section of notable songs and/or artists provides more context and information for someone to follow onward.

For transparency, I originally re-wrote this article (and some related ones) in order to get them to the standard they have been for some years without any challenge (as Altlondon but lost access to that account). Objectivecontents (talk) 12:12, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

My understanding is that there are two approaches to musical genre topics, one used for genres themselves, the other used for lists. At the main genre page, we search for sources actually discussing the genre, and if an artist is consistently mentioned in such sources, we definitely want to tell the reader about them. At the list page, we broaden the search to include any connection linking the genre with the artist, accepting sources discussing the artist's musical style and genre. Binksternet (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

The notability guideline is explicitly not applicable to the contents of articles. It might be used as a criterion for standalone list articles - this is not a list article and it does not apply. If a list were appropriate in the article, that material is entirely appropriate content with adequate sourcing.

However I think Binksternet is probably right, and list on its own is not useful to the reader. Cambial — foliar❧ 17:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

In which case, there doesnt seem not much point in preserving most those references under 'Sources' if they're not specifically attributed within the article. Objectivecontents (talk) 18:05, 3 January 2026 (UTC)