Talk:The View (band)

Alternative music Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

There's more information to come here and the entry is growing to the point it should have History etc. sections. I'll do it as/when I have time if nobody else does. As the band are just now gaining national attention, the page is likely to be accessed more frequently. I've been a user and occasional Wikipedia contributor for a few years - but I'm not an expert by any means. Feel free to improve on any of my efforts or to discuss things here. --Citizensmith 23:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More history added and split into sections--Citizensmith 23:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Way too long

This page is massively overlong for such an unknown band. It seems to have been compiled by someone with an interest in the success of the group --80.41.227.205 02:08, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The band are about to have their second top-20 hit (number 10 on Monday chart update). They topped the Scottish sales charts. They're signed to SONY-BMG. They've twice topped the MTV2/NME video charts. They feature in NME almost every week. They were at T in The Park, Reading and Leeds Festivals. They've just sold out the London Astoria. They've just completed an MTV Gonzo tour. Their 30 min set went out live on Radio 1 at 7:30pm. They are even on Jools Holland in a couple of weeks. They're not exactly an "unknown band" any more!Citizensmith 16:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um...we don't need a detailed itinary here, just a biography. There is so much irrelevant, superfluous crap in this entry it is unreal. Wikipedia is not a promotional tool. --80.41.227.205 01:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't like the band, don't read the page. I don't think anyone is using it as a promotional tool, rather it is information which people want to know; thus making it relevant.

Image Copyright Problems

The original promo photo image used on this page has been deleted by user User_talk:Betacommand as invalid fair use. However this is disputed. See discussion on their talk page. I have replaced this image with one taken by myself, which I have immediate access to, while this is sorted. If anyone has a better image they took themselves or can get written permission from 1965 Records to feature promo shot images in a manner that will satisfy Wikipedia copyright extremists then please do so. Hopefully a better image will be back soon.Citizensmith 13:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've now cropped and sharpened the image so that it's not too bad considering the conditions it was taken under (camera phone held high from the crowd) and, on the plus side, I suppose it does illustrate the band at a large venue.Citizensmith 15:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Future singles claim

Removed "Dance Into The Night and Face For The Radio are scheduled to be the last releases from the album next year." as no verification. Citizensmith 16:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know what age the guys in the view are?

They look about 12! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.153.243.62 (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, they generally look younger than they are. Ages of all either 19 or 20. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Citizensmith (talk • contribs) 23:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Recently Changed "Singles" Edit

I really don't see much point in adding the B-sides of the singles themselves to the "Singles" section, as far as I know they weren't double-A sides and i have NEVER seen an article before where the b-sides are listed that way. I won't revert because I'm not a fan of this Deletionist Crap but I also think it looks stupid. Just a comment.--SteelersFan UK06 15:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. RedTreddersCompainion any comments? Thanks for the creation of the articles though. It's just the singles listings that are confusing. By the way I think there is a Double A-side single scheduled for the future and it would be appropriate on that.Citizensmith 15:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi, there are no double a-sides released by the band, however, i would think that people would know what song is on the a side and which is on the b side if i worte them in that format (a side/b side), much like it is used on the The Beatles Discography page for their singles ((eg. All You need is Love/Baby Youre a Rich Man)). --RedTreddersCompainion 16:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I still think that this format is misleading and looks like the band have released double-A sides. Most articles have just the single in that box. How about a comprimise, of having the single name and then the B-side below it in a smaller font, or something? The details would still be there, only with a distinguish between the two/three songs.--SteelersFan UK06 19:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]