Jump to content

Talk:Aerosmith: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
re-assessed
Tag: repeating characters
Line 198: Line 198:
Aerosmith is the best selling rock band? What about AC/DC? [[User:Asterix 13|Asterix 13]] ([[User talk:Asterix 13|talk]]) 22:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Aerosmith is the best selling rock band? What about AC/DC? [[User:Asterix 13|Asterix 13]] ([[User talk:Asterix 13|talk]]) 22:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
:The article says that Aerosmith is the bestselling American rock band, which they are. AC/DC is Australian. [[User:Abog|Abog]] ([[User talk:Abog|talk]]) 06:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
:The article says that Aerosmith is the bestselling American rock band, which they are. AC/DC is Australian. [[User:Abog|Abog]] ([[User talk:Abog|talk]]) 06:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

== "Tyler-Perry Feud" ==

Hahahahahahahahahaha

Revision as of 15:27, 8 February 2011

Good articleAerosmith has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 16, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
May 17, 2008Good article reassessmentListed
Current status: Good article


Guitar Hero

A Guitar Hero: Aerosmith page has been created. Please link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mm03gt (talkcontribs) 00:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"String" of Multi-Platinum Albums?

Toys in the Attic was their third album...the previous two constitute a string? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.91.61.98 (talk) 22:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "string of multi-platinum albums" refers to the five mutli-platinum studio albums they released no body can´t use this information lol i´m so very bad in a row in the 1970s that started with their 1973 album Aerosmith, and ended with their 1977 album Draw the Line. Five multi-platinum albums in a row...I'd consider that a "string". Abog (talk) 22:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Toxic Twins.jpg

Image:Toxic Twins.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

name Aerosmith

What's the origin of the name? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 03:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After playing their first gig at the Nipmuc Regional High School in 1970, the band took the name Aerosmith, suggested by drummer Joey Kramer. The name means nothing in particular; it simply was the only name that no one hated. Janadore (talk) 09:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could it have some connection to the 1931 Arrowsmith (film) starring Ronald Colman which in turn was based on Arrowsmith (novel) by Sinclair Lewis?Tom Cod (talk) 06:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

why is there no criticism listed on this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.166.218.4 (talk) 19:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because it generally isn't appropriate for articles on music groups. There are mentions of criticism throughout the article though (selling out in the 1990s; poorly-selling albums in the 1980s, etc.) as well as in related articles (Steven Tyler criticized for saying "home of the Indianapolis 500" while singing the National Anthem; ticket prices on certain tours costing too much money, etc.). Abog (talk) 23:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History 73-97

I bought the CD name Aerosmith - History 1973-1997 (Golden Hits). It isn't on discography in article. Here is cover to see:
FRONT: http://img136.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imgwb8.jpg
BACK: http://img85.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img2vj7.jpg
CD: http://img237.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img3gg0.jpg
And here: http://www.soundsbox.com/album.php?al=1188, I was find that album, but there is another cover. The CD was used, so maybe seller, changed cover, or is it may be fake? Please, if anybody can help. Leave the message on: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyskusja_wikipedysty:Kofeina

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.28.82.167 (talk) 21:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] 
It looks like a bootleg to me. There are so many bootleg and unofficial compilations out there, that it's hard to keep track of and come up with any sort of definitive list. There are only about 25-30 official releases (studio, compilation, and live) by the band and their record companies Columbia and Geffen, or the parent label Sony Music. Everything else is probably either manufactured by another company, is a repackaged/modified version of a prior release, or is a bootleg assembled by someone else. Looking at the images you have provided, there appears to be no identification of the band's record label or any other legitimate company that manufactures music, so methinks it is probably a bootleg. --Abog (talk) 21:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.28.82.167 (talk) 22:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to add a link using the guideline listed as: "Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources." Thanks Sakutak (talk) 04:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm cool with that, unless somebody else has a problem with it. Abog (talk) 05:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why has the link, been removed again? The critera above is still being met. Is someone "not cool" with it, and why? Thanks. Sakutak (talk) 18:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EL - do not knowingly link to websites which contain copyright violations or material which is unsourced and likely to be a copyright violation. And that website is abundant with picture and video links that are unsourced or used without proper consent. Simple as that. Poor quality amateur fansites should never be linked on Wikipedia. Libs (talk) 12:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything in that site is accompanied with a link to the source.

I deleted this entire comment as well as the one on the Libs (talk) discussion page. I do not wish my link on this website. I do not know why you would insist on re-adding the comments. I do not wish to be a member of Wikipedia. I would like my account and all comments deleted. Thanks. The addition of the link was approved in April by Abog. Your views on the quality of the web site were not requested.Sakutak (talk) 21:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Failed

I'm sorry, but I failed the GA nomination for Aerosmith. This failed mainly because of criteria 1: the prose. Especially the organization of the article.

Firstly, the lead is a problem. The first paragraph was good, but the second focused too much on their discography. It was too in-detail for a lead. You don't need to talk about every single and every album. Also, the names of the band members should be in the first paragraph of the lead. Remember, the lead is the highlights of the article, it shouldn't go into that much detail.

Secondly, the organization of the article was not to my liking. Although the article is separated into years, it is rather jumbled, with tours, singles, and albums mixed together. I think it would be advisable to split their singles/albums and their tours into different sections. That would make the article more organized and flow easier. Also, you should have an "Awards" section for all of their awards. What you should do is just break the article up more so it flows.

The article meets the other criteria:

2. It is adequately referenced. Definitely.

3. Appropriate broadness. Yes. Just need to break it down.

4. Written from a neutral point of view. Fine.

5. Article is stable, with no edit wars. Good.

6. Images are used liberally. Good.

It would be very optimistic to put this on hold and expect this to be done in a week, which is why I didn't. With a little fixing, this can easily be a good article. Good job on everyone who contributed to this. Cheers, Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 01:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy Metal?

Aerosmith is not a heavy metal band! The only "metal" song made by Aerosmith is probably Back in the Saddle. Aerosmith isn't even an early metal band. This would be Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Alice Cooper, Aerosmith is just a blues based hard rock band. They came after the first metal bands. Heavy metal should be removed from the info box. 68.102.235.239 (talk) 23:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm sorry, but a lot of their music is. Ever listen to "Round and Round", "Nobody's Fault" or "Rats in the Cellar"? And the fact that they inspired Metallica and every other metal band should say something. Keep in mind that heavy metal is a very wide genre of music. Also, Aerosmith being a heavy metal band is well-cited in many sources, including Allmusic, which is the authoritative source on music information. If it wasn't well-sourced, I'd say remove it, but since it is, it should stay. Abog (talk) 02:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Aerosmith has made any music close to being considered heavy metal since the 1970's though. Most of there later music is just rock really. 68.102.235.239 (talk) 05:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the 1970s make up almost half their catalog. I wholeheartedly agree that they are more of a hard rock band, but the band contributed greatly to the early days of the heavy metal genre, helping pave the way for harder bands that came after them, and enough of their songs have hints of heavy metal to classify them as such. And like I said, Allmusic is pretty much the standard bearer as far as genre classifications, so I'm more going off what they say than I am my personal opinion. Abog (talk) 02:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Their First Gig

Their band did their first gig at Nipmuc High school. The gig consisted of five songs. Those were Deam Police sang by Cheap Trick, All The Young Dudes sang by Mott the Hoople, and the three songs they wrote, Make It, Uncle Salty, and Draw the Line.

Power ballad

Im not an expert in Aerosmith but a lot of their songs have long voiced notes, slow tempo, and of course electric guitars, so why are they not considered a power ballad group? Because of this i think power ballad should be added into the genres/music styles of the group. Dentren | Talk 17:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Power ballad isn't a real genre and just about all mainstream hard rock artists have power ballads anyways. Abog (talk) 19:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Hits

Their greatest hits album ("Walk This way," "Sweet emotion", ...) is not mentioned in the discography. What the heck? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Macetw (talkcontribs) 02:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's because Greatest Hits is a compilation album, not a studio album. Only studio albums are listed on the main article. Listing all the compilation albums would make this section too large. For a list of all albums, including compilations, see Aerosmith discography. Abog (talk) 19:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glam metal

I'm sure it's been discussed before but "glam metal", which is not in the allmusic cite used in the infobox also appeared as de facto 'elements of' in the lead. The only line in the cite given for that reads "Aerosmith was one of the most popular hard-rock bands in America, striking a flamboyant middle ground between the cool, bluesy swagger of the Rolling Stones and the more campy, glam-metal approach of the New York Dolls and Mott the Hoople." I have therefore changed the lead the reflect this.--Alf melmac 08:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"America's Greatest Rock and Roll Band"

A one-liner does not constitute as a name, especially due to the fact that the statement is up to personal opinion. This should be removed. -- BlakFlak (talk) 02:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a nickname. What does it matter? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.213.233 (talk) 19:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It matters that the article here is accurate and reflects what the sources say, as per WP:AWW. Accordingly I have removed one source for this that can no long be accessed and one that didn't mention it. I have adjusted the sentence to fit what the sources actually say. It could, of course read "Kid Rock described them as ...". But I think, "some regard them as..." sounds more positive as a claim to notability. I cannot yet find any reliable sourced that supports the idea of this as a widespread nickname, but I am working on it.--SabreBD (talk) 00:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The nickname certainly doesn't belong in the lead sentence, based on the provided references. However, it does flow nicely in the "Awards and achievements" section, where I have integrated it as follows:

"Aerosmith, sometimes referred to as "The Bad Boys from Boston", is seen by some as America's greatest rock and roll band. However, despite their popularity and success in the 1970s, it wasn't until their comeback in the late 1980s and 1990s that they started winning awards and major recognition."

Hopefully, this will help settle the matter. Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 04:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct English

Is it just me or is the final sentence of the first paragraph simply wrong? Shouldn't the pluperfect tense be used? "By 1971, Tabano had been replaced by Brad Whitford, and the band had begun to develop a following in Boston" makes so much more sense. If, for example, you change "Tabano" to the first person and "1971" to yesterday, you're left with "By yesterday, I was replaced by..." which I think better illustrates the problem. Or is this pedantic? --217.34.44.238 (talk) 15:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has changed it to "In 1971". This is fine. Perhaps that person could have read this page and ended the "Correct English" discussion...--217.34.44.238 (talk) 12:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing album in discography

I didn't see the "Aerosmith-Live Bootleg" album in the discography for this article. It came out in November of 1978. It was a double album and was entirely live. The artwork for the album was intended to look like a shoddy fly-by-night operation had produced it in someone's basement. There were even "stains" from someone's coffee cup on the album cover. Is it possble that the compiler of this article was fooled by the title of the album (which was a tongue-in-cheek type joke) and thought it was not a legitimate publication? If so, they can go to the official Aerosmith website and find it in the discography there. Hopefully that will clear up any confusion.

75.187.193.108 (talk) 03:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should we really have HM in the infobox?

While Aerosmith do have several songs that qualify as metal in my mind, isn't it a bit overkill to call them a metal band? Yes, there are a good amount of sources that refer to them as metal, but we have a source for them doing some R&B and that isn't in the infobox. I think it's safer to say they incorpated metal into their sound instead of labeling them a metal band. This is just my take on their style: Rock, hard rock, blues-rock. Thoughts anyone? Rockgenre (talk) 23:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Tyler Leaving the Band

So far, as of today (11/9/09), there has been NO OFFICIAL CONFIRMATION that Tyler has left the band. His behavior has been bizarre, and he's made statements that he's gone, but all we know for sure is that there's confusion right now. Even Joe Perry doesn't know for sure what's going on. I don't think that Tyler should be listed as a former member yet. Zappafrank2112 (talk) 00:40, 10 November 2009

I agree 100% with this. Joe Perry saying he heard on the Internet that Tyler is leaving the band is hardly confirmation of anything. As far as I'm concerned, this is still in rumor stage. Crazydiamond1to9 (talk) 03:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that this page needs to be locked from editing until there is a confirmation that Tyler left the band and/or the band has broke up. Right now, anything that has been changed saying that any of that stuff has happened, should be reverted back to what it was originally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joke Insurance (talkcontribs) 03:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I just reverted another anonymous edit that moved Tyler out of the band, which someone did while I was trying to clean up the existing current text about Tyler. Who knows how many of these people we'll see? - AyaK (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Almost the whole Perry leaving section has been copied from elsewhere. See http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=%22perry+was+interviewed+this+morning%22&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&fp=8bd4816e1661ba1a . It even refers to an audio player at the bottom of the page. I deleted the part I was (pretty) sure had been copied. Mitchell k dwyer (talk) 04:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the OP. As of now, we only have confirmation that Joe Perry read something on the internet. That is gossip to the extreme. We have no reliable confirmation that Steven Tyler has left the band and we most definitely have no reliable indication that the band is on hiatus. We shouldn't follow these rumours. 94.212.31.237 (talk) 15:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOCK I suggest that this page be either locked or semi-protected. The state of the band is currently in flux, and this page is a mess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CDaly (talkcontribs) 04:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think Tyler's public comment yesterday that he isn't leaving Aerosmith will get this to settle down. Let's leave it alone for now. - AyaK (talk) 18:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BBC article. Straight from the horse's mouth. He's not quitting. Erzsébet Báthory(talk|contr.) 20:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


It's so funny how on wikipedia that you guys jump on every tabloid piece and change whole articles around before getting all of the facts. That's why wikipedia will never be considered a real encyclopedia. Jamisonhalliwell 23:55, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Now that Tyler has rejoined the band, shouldn't he be added back to the Current Members list? GoingBatty (talk) 21:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Steven Tyler is currently listed as a current member. --Kar.ma 09:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Devil's Got A New Disguise

in 2006, Aeromsith Released A Album Called: Devil's Got A New Disguise. Devil's Got A New Disguise Is Not Listed In The Album Section :O! Plz Note This! Here Is The Picture From Aerosmith's OFFICAL Web: [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.181.11 (talk) 17:16, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Devil's Got a New Disguise is a compilation, and not a studio album, that's why it's not listed here. It is listed in the article about full Aerosmith discography. --Kar.ma 09:56, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Best selling rock band?

Aerosmith is the best selling rock band? What about AC/DC? Asterix 13 (talk) 22:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that Aerosmith is the bestselling American rock band, which they are. AC/DC is Australian. Abog (talk) 06:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Tyler-Perry Feud"

Hahahahahahahahahaha