Why aren't The Flaming Lips on prog archives?

Because they're not really prog? I dunno.

If i remember right i think someone suggested a few years back but i'm not sure what happened to it. Obviously it didn't lead to them being included. Tags on RYM do include progressive pop on many of their newer albums. I agree that they definitely were out of the box thinkers but i think most consider them a form of chamber pop, dream pop and neo-psychedelia without enough prog elements or prog connections to warrant inclusion. That's just my take. I do like their albums since their early noise rock stage.

There are a lot of bands that are not on PA that could be and a lot that probably shouldn't be. It's often down to the whims of the admin team quite honestly and not an exact science. Growing up in the seventies ''Prog' was ELP, Yes and Genesis of the most popular bands but now it's just a whole bunch of stuff. Stick around and you can enjoy the endless discussions about what is prog and what isn't. It's often hilarious and not at all illuminating!

Looks like they were reviewed by Crossover and Psyche back in '09 & '10 and got moved to Related. I can't find any discussion of them there. I don't think there's any reason why we couldn't review them again.

^ true but the argument is that bands like Mercury Rev and similar acts SHOULDN'T BE HERE in the first place. With so many truly progressive rock bands in the world of yore and present, i tend to agree that these types of bands aren't prog related enough by modern standards.

You can suggest them for inclusion via the Suggest New Bands section of the forum.

Well......to me they certainly are as 'proggy' as many of the bands that are in Prog Related but as someone said above we already have some questionble entries... so maybe we should be dumping some instead of adding more?

^ i would vote them down. Krautrock itself is often prog related. A lot of it isn't prog at all really. Prog related was never meant to be an all encompassing category. Artists have to have some relationship to the prog world as well as showing some prog characteristics. I've heard numerous albums by the Flamers and although i love a bunch of them, i wouldn't call them prog related really, just super psychedelic at times. All psychedelic rock isn't progressive. As for the comparisons that so many make about other bands on this site, i wouldn't mind seeing some of them deleted honestly. I think the bar for P.R. has been raised since many of those acts were included. Just my opinion. If they do get on the site it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

they are prog

I supported The Flaming Lips for PA after Embryonic came out as I thought that album was appropriate for this site partially due to its Krautrock qualities and I had felt that albums like Zaireeka, The Soft Bulletin, and Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots would not be out of place. I don't know the later material. I would have thought the Psych category, but it has been along time since I listened to the band. I seriously would consider it for Prog Related as long as sufficient Prog connections (not just how it sounds) are spelled out, and that I feel like a reasonable case has been presented that ticks off the Prog related boxes re the subgenre description and CLICK A lot of people have disagreed with the Flaming Lips being in PA over the years and the lack of consensus is a big part of why it is not in. I am more wary when it comes to controversial additions and it is all the more reason for really compelling arguments with lots of details justifying the addition (would want such things in the bio). Compelling arguments do matter for Prog Related and Proto Prog as well as divisive as prog bands generally.