Jump to content

Talk:Fall Out Boy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PrincessOfHearts (talk | contribs) at 15:02, 30 July 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

News links on Fall Out Boy page

Hi, I saw that the Fall Out Boy page has some links to interviews, but I thought the page could benefit from a link to an external resource with lots of fresh news. The news page at Shoutmouth.com contains more than 50 Fall Out Boy news stories over the past 3 months, and I think it's very good resource. I understand if you don't want to add the link -- but I do think it adds value. This is the news source I proposed adding to the FOB page: Fall Out Boy Newsbob

Stannersross 13:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Pete[reply]

Deleted

I deleted the genre "emo". There was a lot of arguing about it, but I did it.--Calario freebie 03:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


AWARDS???

YOUR TELLING ME FALL OUT BOY HAS NEVER BEEN NOMINATED OR EVEN WON AN AWARD??? THERE SHOULD BE A SECTION. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.15.48.50 (talk) 17:13, April 19, 2007 (UTC)

If you know they have, this would be a great opportunity for you to add something constructive to WIkipedia. --LaraLoveTalk/Contribs 21:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do it. I found a website that has all of the awards they won and the nominations. PrincessOfHearts 22:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Choice Music - Rock Track for "Dance, Dance"
  • Choice Music - Single for "Dance, Dance"
  • Choice Music - Rock Group
  • MTV Video Music Award - Viewer's Choice "

Nominated for KCA's - Best Band

THIS NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT!!!

203.82.48.171 12:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Maroo[reply]

Apperances on Cruel As School Children

Patrick Stump appeared in three songs by Gym Class Heroes. Not just Cupid's Chokehold and Clothes Off! He appeared in 7 Weeks also. So could you please change that. It is bothering me. HE APPEARED IN THREE SONGS!!!!!!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.247.21.21 (talk) 16:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

only william beckett appears in 7 weeks.


K of C

knights of columbus halls are prevelant thruout illinois, probably elsewhere as well. references to them playing one without specifics seems inaccurate

68.78.26.205 00:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

How do we know if Fall Out Boy's emocore? Do you have any proof?--989 RVD 02:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.isound.com/fall_out_boy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/readingandleeds06/lineupandartists/fall_out_boy/
http://www.rockdetector.com/artist,53816.sm
http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/falloutboy/albums/album/294415/review/6210973/a_santa_cause_its_a_punk_rock_christmas
So say they. --LaraLoveTalk/Contribs 03:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Out Boy is in no way emocore. That is a ridiculous statement. Fall Out Boy shows no sign of any type of emo influence. How they would fit into the genre of emocore is beyond me. Emocore was like Rites of Spring and other Emotive Hardcore Punk bands. Fall Out Boy doesn't even seem to be influenced by Post-Emo Indie Rock. That should be removed. Spreading misinformation is not the job of an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.75.131 (talk • contribs)

Just because fall out boy claims they are emo it doesn't mean they are.wtf


They're not emo, but I think they use elements of it in their music.

Its a proven fact that if you are emo, you will always deny it. Besides, they aren't emo, and only one of their songs is even close to emo. That song is 7 Minutes in Heaven, and the only reason that it is almost close to emo is because its talking about Pete trying to kill himself, but it still is the only thing about the band itself that is even close to emo. BTW, they're too awesome to be emoMUSiC CHiC

You have proof that if you really are "emo" that you will always deny it? 76.2.116.135 02:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard two FOB songs (admittedly... only 2) and this description confounds me. Can somebody please explain this to me. I mean.. they sound like Panic at the Disco because they helped out Panic!, NOBODY KNEW ABOUT THEM UNTIL fob WENT ON TOUR WITH THEM AND TOLD EVERYONE ABOUT THE RADICAL NEW BAND..--Dr who1975 18:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pop-rock would be more appropriate. Manupod 19:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes... so does anybody object to me removing or changing it?--Dr who1975 19:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First time I hear them i thought- pop-punk.They're pop-punk but mixed with soft core emo. Pop-emo would be appropriate (that last was a joke =] ) Xr 1 21:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I think of pop punk.. I think of Green Day and Blink 182... fast drum beats and power chords... I'd call FOB emo before pop punk but apparently that's controversial as well (and since I don't apparently know enough about emo I'd probably stay away from that altogether). This band is such a hybrid... I think altenrative rock and rock pop are better descriptions.--Dr who1975 21:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Alternative and Pop-rock are a much closer description of their sound. We should stray away from using the term "emo" with so-called "third wave emo" because it is very controversial and generally untrue to what the genre is. There are much better ways to describe bands like P!ATD and FOB, since they don't fit into the criteria of emo (much less emocore). They are loosely by bands bands that could be debated as emo/post-emo indie (such as the Get-up Kids) but still don't fit the sound of the genre. Manupod 01:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look here [1] Fall Out Boy-genres: Punk-Pop, Emo. Look in their MySpace [2] Genre: Pop-punk Just Keep like it is now. Xr 1 06:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

theyre more of punk/pop-rock, depending on the song.

Fall Out Boy just isn't emo in anyway. To say they are emocore is just ridiculous. Pop-punk maybe, but its a stretch. And just because a site says they are emo doesn't mean they are right. If you ask just about anyone who knows emo, and knows the origin of emo they will tell you Fall Out Boy is not even close. Mayve we should add "Disputed Sub Genres" like My Chem. Manupod 11:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Manupod, what is Emo anyway. Tell me in detail why Fall Out Boy is not Emo. I always thought Emo was emotional music that sounds like Morrisey or the Smiths (in which case Fall Out Boy definetly wouldn't measure up). To me, Fall Out Boy sounds just like Panic at the Disco which is apparently an Emocore band. Apparently The Faint, one of my favorite bands, is Emo to some people but I don't understand why.
If the FOB proclaims themselves to be Emo I'd be willing to give them a little leeway there. Obviously if someone like Garth Brooks proclaimed himself to be Emo I'd fight it. But if a band like Fall Out Boy say's they're Emo then I think they're music is close enough to whatever Emo is supposed to be that they should have it listed at least as a disputed genre. The same would be true if they declared themselves Pop Punk(which they have not.. in fact, I didn;t see anything about Emo or Pop Punk on that myspace page), in such a case, I'd still disagree with the Pop Punk tag but I'd be willing to give a little leeway. Sounds like I need to check out the My Chemical Romance page later today.--Dr who1975 14:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Emo stands for Emotive/Emotional Hardcore. It started as a subgenre of Hardcore Punk in the mid 80's in Washington DC. Ian MacKaye (of Minor Threat/Embrace/Fugazi) is said to have coined the term to describe The Band Rites of Spring. Emo bands in the 80's had loud, distorted guitars and generally screamed vocals accompanied by emotional, less rebellious lyrics. This is what has become known as Emocore. Some Emocore bands are Rites of Spring, Gray Matter, Moss Icon. Calling Fall Out Boy Emocore is simply ridiculous because Emocore had a much heavier sound that what people would call punk (The Sex Pistols for example). You would obviously not call FOB punk. Example: [3]

After the period of prominent Emocore bands came the so-called "Second Wave" of Emo, which is generally called Post-Emo Indie Rock. Post-Emo Indie was influenced by Emocore bands, but had a much more melodic sound. Bands under that genre would be Sunny Day Real Estate, Mineral, Jawbreaker (borderline emocore), Braid, Texas is the Reason, and The Appleseed Cast. These bands are much softer and contain less screaming. Many people argue that even they are true emo. Even so, most Post-Emo Indie bands contain a more punk influenced sound than what you may call Pop-Punk.

FOB was influenced by bands such as The Get-Up Kids, Jimmy Eat World, and Dashboard Confessional, which have Post-Emo Indie influence, but are generally considered indie/pop-rock. Fall Out Boy have a small amount of Post-Emo influence, but simply do not fit the criteria of what Emo music is. If you do not think they fit the criteria of pop-punk then they can not even come close to emocore. Panic! at the Disco and The Faint are not emo either. Panic! at the Disco is strictly Alternative/Pop-Rock and show no punk or emo influence. The Faint are Indie Rock. Manupod 19:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Because you're blind =]in their myspace page under their logo and above their picture is written Pop-Punk. And I'm not saying they truly are emo, but some amount of influence...

They have some influence, but they don't qualify as Emo (much less emocore). Green Day and Blink 182 have punk influence, but that doesn't make them punk. Led Zeppelin has a lot of blues influence, but that doesn't makes them a blues band. Manupod 19:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I meant the same thing. And generally they are pop-punk!

They are basically just pop-rock. That is why emo should be taken out of the genre listing. Manupod 19:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me preface what I'm about to write with I don't care if they are Emo , Emocore, Elmo from Sesame street or not, you're arguing with the wrong guy about that. I double checked the my space page... the "pop punk" is in dark font in front of a dark backround, are they trying to hide the words? I still don't agree that they are pop punk but I guess I'll need to find an expert citation arguing for that if I'm to at least put it under disputed genres.--Dr who1975 03:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did some more reasearch... the "pop punk" is there for search purposes and it means "Pop and Punk" not "Pop Punk" as oultined by FOB themselves in this interview. The words are in a tiny, dark font against a dark backround (you'd have to have super vision to see it). I'll be removing the pop punk shortly from this page.--Dr who1975 03:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since I'm apparently much better at doing research than you, I did you a favor and found this interview where FOB definitevly says they are not EMO. I'm so blind, I simply typed "Fall Out Boy" "not emo" into google and it came up. You're welcome.--Dr who1975 03:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna say that they are not Punk.Listen to some Punk and you'll see they're not punk.And they're not Pop-they can't be that.So the most appropriate seems to be pop-punk.May be they don't like this category because they have other influences too and don't sound like other pop-punk bands.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Xr 1 (talk • contribs)

They are most definetly Pop... pop is any band that uses some derivation of the verse-chorus-verse-bridge-verse structure so it's pretty all encompassing. They have punk elements... but that does not make them punk. Instead of listing punk as a genre... you should work it into the article itself.--Dr who1975 15:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
According to FOB, they are pop and punk but not pop punk. WTF? Pop punk is "a fusion genre that combines elements of punk rock with pop music, to varying degrees." --LaraLoveTalk/Contribs 15:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, to varying degrees, however FOB's music does not have the degree/elements of punk tht are typical for pop punk, for instance their songs do not have a punky beat like most Green Day, Blink 182, and Offspring songs have. Please read this interview where FOB themselves proclaim that they are not pop punk. You may have also noticed I have cited the article in the Musical Style section. If you think about it, they also have elements of hardcore music and of punk and their lyrics are very emotional, but that doesn't make them Emo either now does it. If FOB is pop punk then they must also by Emo and Emocore since they have those elements too.--Dr who1975 17:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh...Thnks Fr Th Mmrs is also written with a dark font in the dark background.May be they are trying to hide the name of their new single?... Xr 1 19:27, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's the name of the new single?--Dr who1975 20:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I said it. 'Thnks Fr Th Mmrs'. It's also in the article.Xr 1 20:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Out boy call their music pop/punk it says on their myspace. I agree with them. The take overs the break overs video is coming out soon!

"(they are in a tiny, dark font against a dark backround)" I can't believe this is actually in the article. Pointing this out is misleading, as if you're trying to say that it's purposefully that way in order to attempt to hide it. They've been asked to definitively state what genre they feel they are in and they--like so many other bands--dance, dance around it. "Pop and punk, but not pop punk". Pop punk is a fusion of pop and punk. To be kinda pop and kinda punk is to be pop punk. It's the entire point of the creation of the genre. But they don't want to be labeled, so they pretend to be their own unique hybrid of pop punk that goes by some other name, but they aren't revealing it. Will all of that fit into the info box? Probably not. Regardless, the Musical Style section needs to be removed until it can be fully expanded. Which, as can be noted in my rant above, will probably not be anytime soon. Regards, LaraLoveTalk/Contribs 16:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've been researching to try to reslove this once and for all. Here are my results (emphasis mine)...
This is from Walmart.com:
"Career Overview
The mercurial term "emo" has meant many different things since its first appearance in the mid-1980s hardcore punk underground. By the mid 2000s, the term was best exemplified by the band Fall Out Boy. Playing an accessible brand of melodic rock marked by clever, classically angsty lyrics and the blistering energy of punk's harsher sub-genres, Fall Out Boy rocketed to near TRL superstardom following the release of 2005's From Under the Cork Tree.
Biography
Originating from Chicago, Illinois, USA, emocore band Fall Out Boy began to take shape at the turn of the new millennium. Formed by [current members], all the members had played with different emo and metal-core units based around Chicago's insular underground hardcore scene. [...] A demo CD emerged in 2001 [...] The short and snappy Fall Out Boy's Evening Out With Your Girlfriend [...] served notice of the quartet's fast developing mastery of the pop punk style and their witty, self-referential lyrics. Released only a few months later, the quartet's [...] Take This To Your Grave, was completed [...] The album's strong critical reception allied to support from the band's powerful internet-based fanbase, established Fall Out Boy's reputation at the forefront of the alternative rock scene. [...]"
MTV.com reads:
"[...] As Fall Out Boy, the quartet used the unbridled intensity of hardcore as a foundation for melody-drenched pop-punk with a heavy debt to the emo scene. [...]"
AOL Music states "Musical Styles: Emo, Punk-Pop, Indie Rock".
A Rolling Stone article reads:
"A year ago, Wentz and his band -- an emo-ish pop-punk quartet from the wealthy suburbs of Chicago that took its name from the sidekick to Bart Simpson's favorite superhero, Radioactive Man -- were an indie act known only to skateboarding Warped Tour kids."
Many other pages say the same thing. Neither their label nor their band page make note of genre (that I can find). Every reliable--and semi-reliable--source I can find mentions the same genres.
Regards LaraLoveTalk/Contribs 18:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In case you didn't read this response to your comment above before starting this new thread: FOB's music does not have the degree/elements of punk tht are typical for pop punk, for instance their songs do not have a punky beat like most Green Day, Blink 182, and Offspring songs have. Please read this interview where FOB themselves proclaim that they are not pop punk. You may have also noticed I have cited the article in the Musical Style section. If you think about it, they also have elements of hardcore music and of punk and their lyrics are very emotional, but that doesn't make them Emo either now does it. If FOB is pop punk then they must also by Emo and Emocore since they have those elements too.--Dr who1975 20:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you give me a day or two to think about what's best to put there... I will clean up this section along the lines of your suggestions. If you want to take a crack at it before I get to it then I'm sure we can come to an understanding. As for the tiny, dark font, Being there for search puposes is a valid rational for it being hidden.... it doesn't imply any sort of disingeniune motive. If you feel the article is too POV then we can clean it up a bit, I do think all the basic information I've added is relevant. As for the overall Pop Punk /Emo thing... if Fall Out Boy says they aren't pop punk then surely that trumps MTV's assesment at least to some degree. Considering the information can be made available under Musical Style - through Disputed Subgenres, I think that is where the information should reside. I still need to check your citations, but I want to say that it's difficult to cite some sites such as Wal Mart because they are trying to sell things at the retail level becuase direct sales pages are many times not allowed on wikipedia (plus, being direct retail also colors their description of the work as they are purposely, deceptively trying to reach a wider audience).--Dr who1975 20:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see that previous reply. And yea, about Wal-Mart, in my original edit I'd put that I wasn't sure how reliable it would be considered, but then I found the additional sites. I totally understand your point, but mine is that while the band says they aren't Emo, Emocore or Pop-punk, they don't say what they are. Peter says their pop and their punk but they're not pop-punk. That makes no sense. That's like saying I'm a little red and a little white but I'm not pink. Red and white makes pink. Mixing pop and punk makes pop-punk. I don't know. It's a pain in the ass. It's only a genre, but this is an encyclopedic article, so it needs to be as accurate as possible. Everyone claims the same genres, for the most part, but the band denies them all without clarification. So what do we put? Popish punk rock with emo influence? I don't think the line is that wide. That's sarcasm, for anyone who missed it... no "are you crazy?" replies. --LaraLoveT/C 03:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Peter says their pop and their punk but they're not pop-punk. That makes no sense." - Yeah!That's really stupid.Combining elements of pop and punk is pop-punk and they are doing that. "Popish punk rock with emo influence?" That's the thing =] Xr 1 07:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put back the Alternative Rock but left the pop rock off. I don;t think there was any dispute about the Alternative Rock (I also don't see why anyone would have a problem with pop rock but since I was the guy who put it there I'll just let that go).--Dr who1975 22:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are definitely some sort of rock, but I think calling them emo rock is going just a little too far. If they really were an emo rock band then there would be more than one song about suicide, and Pete and Patrick would be screaming in almost every song. FOBaholic 02:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the musical style section should be omitted for now, because it doesn't really have anything that is necessary. Bring it back when this is all settled, or keep it out if it is found not to be needed. --Lostmeatthelost 21:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Out boy call their music pop/punk it says on their myspace. I agree with them. The take overs the break overs video is coming out soon! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.242.99 (talk) 16:18, June 20, 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Fall_Out_Boy#Pop_Punk?!?!?!. LaraLoveT/C 04:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pete Wentz must be trying to trick himself. FOB falls into no other category but pop-punk. fast drums, power chords, even their CD's structures are the definition of pop-punk. No matter how the term EMO began, in modern times it means music in which the musicians complain about girls breaking up with them, or starting relationships with girls. Fall Out Boy is a emo punk band. Alternative music is music that dosen't really fit into any other genre, fall out boys music does fit into a genre. they sound very much like all other bands in their genre, emo pop punk.

No...no..... Emo is a specific genre, and Fallout Boy are nowhere near that genre... The Used and MCR COULD be described as emo....but Fallout Boy? No way... There's no hardcore emotion, no wailing voice...and they don't take themselves seriously enough to be emo...

I think they nailed the whiny lyrics, though.Codackussell 02:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But, according to You Don't Know Emo, which i believe has the CLOSEST definition to the correct meaning of emo, Fall Out Boy do not fall under the category of emo. The closest thing i can say is read this page, and examine it for yourselves. Emo music, in any form, is all UNDERGROUND and alot of it is very abrasive and really not a marketable variant of punk, as per Fall Out Boy, who have alot of mainstream success, and write really catchy pop songs. Given this information, any reasonable person could clearly and easily deduce that Fall Out Boy and any relevant bands on MTV or FUSE or whichever station plays alot of alternative rock, are NOT emo. They may have some small characteristics of the original genre in their music (which does NOT mean "whiny" vocals or lyrics), but that is just that, a characteristic. The overwhelming presence in their music is pure POP PUNK.

Here is a link to the website. http://www.youdontknowemo.tk/

Thank you. 76.2.116.135 01:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Where does the name come from?

Wouldn't an explanation of the name Fall Out Boy be a good piece of info for the article? That's what I came here to look for. 

  Vlad Tepes IV 15:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They hint that it's a simpson's reference in this interview... Radioactive Man's sidekick Fallout Boy. This is the same interview where they say they're not pop punk.--Dr who1975 15:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a source to back this up, but it's been my understanding since before the release of Take This to Your Grave that, at a live show, they asked the audience for suggestions for their name, and Fall Out Boy was something somebody from the crowd yelled.

If there isnt a source to back it up then why has it been changed? The alternative explanation is the most likely but as there is no concrete evidence either way, that part should be removed as per the guidelines. Freddie McPhyll 13:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There Just Pop Punk. I Saw On There MYSPACE —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.53.174.6 (talk) 23:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

They are still not pop punk. The words pop punk on that page are there for search purposes and mean "pop and punk" not "pop punk". I explained this in the article but somebody thought it best to remove it. Please see previous discussion.--Dr who1975 14:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


is big time whiny ass emo a genre?

didnt think so.

be constructive 88.106.209.221 20:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spotting that. It was in place for two hours and is now fixed. --TeaDrinker 20:10, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the "disputed" tag from the article page and placing the original "controversial" tag here. It's not appropriate to have a disputed tag on the page considering there are valid references. But if anyone feels the need to argue about it further, this is the spot. Regards, LaraLoveT/C 06:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply] 

 I think alternative rock is a good name for it, but shouldnt Pop Rock be considered? Although they have all the characteristics of the genre, the band stated that they are not a pop punk band, but to me i feel like pop rock is a genre befitting their music, as it has aspects of both realms especially on Infinity On High.

76.2.116.135 01:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Logo color

Why is there a block of light blue behind the logo. The file does not have that at all and where the image was taken from[4], there is a black background. I guess I'm looking at something wrong, but does anyone see why it's baby blue? Cnota 05:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Major changes to article

Before making major changes to the article (ie. removing paragraphs of information, adding or renaming sections, etc.) make sure you understand Wikipedia policies. I'm restoring and correcting as much information as I can, but to prevent the necessity for such attention, read through some guidelines or ask before making changes.

Wikipedia is not a trivia book, work it into the body if it's relevant

  • Fall Out Boy got their name from a fan who shouted to them "call yourself Fall Out Boy" and from that moment on they did (said by Pete Wentz in an interview)

[5]

  • The Knights of Columbus Hall was the site of many early Fall Out Boy shows. Their video for "Dead on Arrival" was filmed there, which also served as a site for several "secret shows".
  • In 2005, the band's stability was threatened when Wentz overdosed on the sedative Ativan in a failed suicide attempt.
  • They have also collaborated with producer Timbaland for his new album Timbaland Presents Shock Value. They are featured in Timbaland's song, "One & Only", on which Stump and Wentz both contributed in writing.[1]
  • The title of the song "7 Minutes in Heaven 'Atavan Haven'" from their album From Under the Cork Tree is based upon Wentz's attempted suicide.
  • The only non-rock act they have toured with is Paul Wall

Regards, LaraLoveT/C 18:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ready for Good Article nomination?

No. But I would like for it to be. I spend hours reviewing articles, many of which on topics I know nothing about, and don't really care about, and I help promote some of those to GA status. It's occurred to me, why not just use my GA knowledge to promote an article on a topic I love to GA status? So that brings me here. Considering there are a few editors who regularly edit this article, I'd like to list all suggestions here for discussion.

To make things easier, I've successfully requested the the semi-protection be restored, so we won't have to worry about vandalism from IPs and new registers. Also, for consistency sake:

  • please be sure all additions use one space between sentences as opposed to two, as that is the format this article utilizes.
  • Any information added to the lead must be expanded upon in the body of the article.
  • Be sure references are added along with new information, as applicable, using cite templates (see WP:CITE).

Images

  • We need a good concert photo that has all of the boys in it to replace the current infobox image which has only three in view. The image can not be copyrighted in anyway... no rights reserved.
  • I think this article would better benefit from the use of album covers placed in their respective sections and thumbnail images in the discography table. Similar to My Chemical Romance, for example.
  • Screen shots from their videos would also be good. Not to say all these images would be used, but it would be nice to have a few to choose from.

Audio

If anyone has any experience in sample boxes, that would be a great addition for this article. "Dance, Dance" and "This Ain't a Scene, It's an Arms Race" are definite needs.

Expansion of information

  • Expanding "2001-2002: The beginning" would be good.
  • Has FOB cited any bands as inspiration? This would be a good addition to the Musical style section.
  • For balance, a criticism section, if applicable.

I'll go through the article in its entirety soon, but those are some initials issues. Regards, LaraLoveT/C 17:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PICTURE??

ok is up with that crappy picture of them? it doesn't even have the whole band, you might as well just leave it blank. why can't you people use the promotional infinity on high photo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.15.48.89 (talk) 18:38, May 16, 2007 (UTC)

Four tildes (~), sign your posts.
Infoboxes cannot contain copyrighted images of living persons, even with fair use rationales. As you can read above, there is a request for concert pictures including the entire band. If you are displeased with the current image, by all means, find a good one that has been released into the public domain and replace it. LaraLoveT/C 01:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

I think that there should be a section in the article about critisism. Every FOB fan knows that Fall Out Boy gets criticized alot FOBaholic 02:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was also mentioned in the pre-GA nomination suggestions above. Feel free to contribute some sourced information. --LaraLoveT/C 04:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone criticised them for going on live earth (an anti-climate change tour) while going on a tour sponsored by Honda Civic (an anti-climate company)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.172.23 (talk) 08:55, May 24, 2007 (UTC)

That's a good point. Something to look into! LaraLoveT/C 18:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt they have yet, since this year's tour is promoting the Civic Hybrid. Plus, they are giving away a Hybrid tonight's show (Monday, June 11). As for other criticism, if I recall correctly, in a interview with the Rolling Stone or SPIN mag, Patrick Stump stated that the band was accused of being a boyband. However, he counterstated by saying "Boyband?! Dude, I'm fat!" or something in the sense of those words.--Lostmeatthelost 22:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spelling

ffs, can someone fix the spellibng of australia 58.165.148.113 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hum Hallelujah

This side have been protectet, so I can't change it, but "Hum Hallelujah" is for sure not the new single, according to a Q&A Pete Wentz has written on FOBR. "question: can you please end all the rumors right now... WHATS the next single?

--- oxox -ZOE asked by rckergal on May 29, 2007


answer: its not decided yet. but it will NOT be hum hallelujah. that songs means something on a different level to us. answered by peter on May 30, 2007"

Sorry for mistakes, im danish.

VANDALISM ON FALL OUT BOY PAGE.

Australia in 2005 2006

Fall out boy did not tour australia in any of these years they first toured australia this year in march.

What the hell is he saying

after suger were going down no one seems to under stand what he says in his songs if anybody can under stand him please tell me WTF he's saying

This might help. LaraLoveT/C 06:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-enclyclopedia language

In the intro section the sentance: In February 2007, the band released Infinity on High to major chart success, selling 260,000 copies its first week. The phrase "to major chart success" is point of view and should be removed or else cited as a quote attribuatble to someone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.35 (talk) 10:00, July 6, 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see how that's a point of view. If an album is more successful than others, then it hits major chart success. // DecaimientoPoético 16:21, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the problem. Consider the Billboard chart listing as the attributable quote. If #1 ain't major, then I'm not sure what is. LaraLoveT/C 05:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Sign your posts, four tildes (~).

Inaccuracies

[Spuddy has chosen to self-censor most of her (yes, I am indeed a female) correspondences in this section as she feels the quarrel was frivolous and does not represent her in a true light. If you really want to read it, it's archived.]Spuddy 17 00:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then source it to the interviews, otherwise I'm reverting the edits. Also, when moving discussions on the talk page (which I believe is discouraged), don't delete any content. LaraLove 05:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa, let's not start an edit war. Now Spuddy, Lara has a point. Articles need to apply to verifiability standards. If you have important content you would like to add, you should source your info. Just add The article, tha date, and maybe it will turn up somewhere on the web (see WP:CITE#HOW and WP:CITET for guidelines). Otherwise, we can't know if it's correct. Just stay cool, and be bold. J-stan Talk 18:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks J-stan. Here's the thing, Spuddy, I posted exactly two sentences to you. The first being a notice that I would revert any unsourced edits (as it is WP policy) and the second making an observations that, as far as I'm aware, one should not move discussions or remove content. As for what you removed, I don't know. Comparing the versions did not make it easily clear what content was removed. And let's face it, my "almighty Internet-moderator-type" post to you could have been worse. Let's just be real... you were basically contradicting yourself. You stated that people need to stop making edits based upon their own research, then you try to justify your edits based upon your own research. If you got the information from an interview on a DVD, then source the DVD. Otherwise, as you just pointed out that making edits based upon ones own unsourced research is inappropriate, I'll revert those edits. If you would then like to "revert them right back" then have at it. Rather than get involved in an edit war, as J-stan suggested may happen, I'll just open an RFC. With that said, my comments to you have nothing to do with adminship. One does not have to be an admin to be a custodian over an article. As one of the custodians of this article, I'm not going to let OR sit. So perhaps you should take things less personally and lose your own attitude when addressing those who have spent much time cleaning up the article you're dropping OR into.
As far as sourcing "non-internet things", see WP:CITE. Not all references on WP are to other websites. Books, journals, newspapers, yearbooks, dissertations, press releases, videos, radio, television, etc. can all be sourced. If it exists and it's where you got your information, it can probably be sourced. Drop a line on my talk page if you need help doing this. I'll leave the info for a couple more days. If it's still unsourced, it's going to be removed. Regards, LaraLove 06:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, moving discussions to the bottom of the talk page is fine. Instead of deleting conversations, they get archived. J-stan Talk 16:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He has a point, Lara. You do have a condescending attitude in this section. Now Spuddy, Lara wouldn't have to take it upon herself to delete supposedly inaccurate info if there was a way to justify it. We can't source it, because we don't have the info that you do. Now we can end it here, with the article in it's current state, or Laralove can step aside for a moment, and Spuddy17 can add his info (With sources, mind you. See my above comment for links on how), thus improving the article. It's up to you two. But please - Let's be adults. J-stan Talk 20:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If some believe I'm condescending, then so be it. I'm not changing my views. The fact that you wrote it two years ago, explains a bit. Standards for articles were much lower then, so I've been told. I'm hoping to eventually bring this article up to GA (maybe beyond), but that will never happen as long as there are editors who "don't take Wikipedia too seriously, especially not to spend time documenting [...] sources and whatnot." While it's not rare by any means to encounter editors who prefer to let others do the heavy lifting, so to speak, for them, I can't exactly go cite the references you used considering I don't know. I've never before seen an editor basically state that they can't be bothered to document their references. When you add to that the fact that you are opposed to the inclusion of original research, it's even more difficult to understand. Taking all your comments into account, you've basically said that you believe information added to an article needs to be attributed to a source, unless you're adding that information, in which case, including references is a waste of time. You call me condescending. What shall I call you? LaraLove 18:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While you do have a point in that if editors can take the time to add content, it's their responsibility to source it, I would really like there to not be an argument over it all. I'm trying to mediate things to make the discussion go away from an edit war, and neither of you are helping by making personal attacks. J-stan Talk 19:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your mediation efforts J-stan, but I would like to make a few points. First, I've not even reverted any of his changes to the article. Second, I already stated that I'm not getting involved in an edit war. I have somewhere around 3,500 edits, none of which include edit-warring. Third, I'm not making personal attacks. I'm making points. His edits and his comments do not make sense to me. There isn't a consistency. I appreciate that he's a custodian to this article and has been for some time, but he and I have differing goals for the article, it would seem. Mine seem to be supported by Wikipedia policy, while his do not. Also, if you look at the history of his talk page, there have been warnings to him about removing information from the article that other editors have added. He also removes comments from talk pages, and warning messages from his own, which is not appropriate. So don't get me wrong. I hope it doesn't further escalate, and I do apologize for coming off as condescending. If the bahavior continues, however, I assure you there will be no edit war and there will be no big argument. I'll take it to MedCab or the like myself. LaraLove 19:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I misunderstood. I thought there was already the beginning of an edit war, with Spud making edits and you removing them. Second, I mistook some of your comments as attacks. "The fact that you wrote it two years ago, explains a bit. Standards for articles were much lower then" seems like you were making an attack on his contributions to this article, which I'm told are quite extensive.
If you feel you can handle it, I will step down as mediator. I gave it my best shot, you two can take it from here. J-stan Talk 20:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no no. My comment about the standards for articles being lower a couple years ago was not meant as an insult. As a WP:GA/R reviewer, I encounter articles that were promoted to GA in past years and I've been told, during my reviews which detail my bafflement, that the standards for articles (all, not just GAs) were much lower in previous years. So, it was an honest reply to his statement of when many of his edits were made. Looking back over some of the comments, I can see how my words can be misinterpreted, but that's where WP:AGF comes into play. As far as a potential revert war, please look over my first, two-sentence reply. I simply warned that I would remove any unreferenced additions and noted that I didn't think removing content from the talk page was appropriate. I've not yet reverted any of his edits. As far as you mediating, I can't tell if you seem offended by my reply above or not. I hope you don't misunderstand me, in that respect. I appreciate your efforts to mediate. I simply just don't think there is anything here that needs it. But if you do, mediate as you feel so compelled to. LaraLove 04:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not offended. I was simply replying. It seems as though spuddy has nothing more to say, so my work here is done. I appreciate your politeness, and you seem like you have a handle on things. J-stan Talk 18:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LaraLove, might I suggest you taking a thorough look at my talk page before making the assumptions about my two "warnings." In fact, the only time I was "warned" was by user Sabian. He was posting extensive information on individual band members on the band's page. When I removed his edits I clearly stated that the information is more appropriate on that individual band member's page. During this time this user was in "edit wars" with many other users. He was upset with ANYONE who removed his edits, even if he was in the wrong and they were in the right. I do believe he was eventually blocked for a while. I would also love for you to point out where else on my page that I was "warned?" Perhaps you are talking about the incident with user Xdueledx? If you look at the current Fall Out Boy article, you would see that I was indeed the correct one in stating that Fall Out Boy's first album was entitled "Fall Out Boy's Evening Out with Your Girlfriend." She was incorrect yet was angry at me because I removed her incorrect information. So in a way, yes, she did "warn" me, but it turns out she was the wrong one, and I was the right one. And while I'm at it, regarding user EvianBoy, his remark on my page was meant for another user. He mistakenly put it on mine. Every other comment (besides yours) on my talk page can be categorized as correspondences with other users over general inquires or misunderstandings, all in which were resolved, or a user or bot remarking that I made a mistake in my edits. I have never removed anything on Wikipedia without good reason. As for my own talk page, I don't like to have anything on it. It's just the way I am. Wikipedia clearly states on the Talk page guidelines article that it is ok for users to remove comments from others on their own talk pages.
Back to the beginning of our little quarrel, perhaps I was too sensitive regarding your first comment to me. I apologize. I was having a bad week. I still do not agree with the way you addressed me. I do think you need to work on your Internet-interaction tone when dealing with situations you do not prefer. Thanks. Spuddy 17 00:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Group hug! J-stan Talk 00:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) Well, Spuddy, thank you for your apology and I, in turn, also apologize for sounding harsh or whatever. Many of my posts tend to be to the point, I really don't mean them to be rude or pretentious. My way of interacting with others probably won't change... that's just how I am. And I still don't agree with removing comments from any talk page. That's what strike-through and archiving are for. But, as is true with almost all things in WP, it's never fully deleted. I guess we'll just have our disagreements. Hopefully we can work together despite them. And I feel ya on the bad week. Regards, Lara♥Love 04:06, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. J-stan, you are a trip. Thanks for the mediation! :)

No problem, just helping out. I actually had to look up that usage of the word "trip", but I think I have found the right one, and so I thank you. :) J-stan Talk 14:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ROFL XD Lara♥Love 16:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Out Boy did not have to "pay off" the band Give Up the Ghost. The former singer, Wesley Eisold, did indeed sue Fall Out Boy for allegedly stealing many verses and phrases from his work. Eisold and FOB settled out of court, and neither will comment on the situation, so we do not know what the outcome was. http://www.topix.net/content/kri/0980411516153724849637827183200482012072 Spuddy 17 22:33, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does appear that in the credits at the back of the accompanying book with Infinity, Wes Eisold is credited as co-writing "Golden", "The Carpal Tunnel of Love", and "Bang The Doldrums", but I don't know if it was a friendly accreditation, or the result of a legal action. J-stan Talk 22:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)\[reply]
Yeah. I think that's the whole issue. We don't know exactly what circumstance led to his name being there because they won't comment on the situation.Spuddy 17 22:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

power pop

Fall out boy are power pop not alternative- me

Can you find reliable sources to back that up? Lara♥Love 19:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Nominations

Ok, why did someone remove the nominations section. And some of the awards were removed too. PrincessOfHearts 15:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Kellman, Andy. "Timbaland Presents Shock Value". AllMusic.com. Retrieved May 12. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fall_Out_Boy&oldid=148060071"