Talk:Tokio Hotel

Other Things

I've yet to find a solid source on the information that, according to stats released very revently, the number one term googled in Belgium is "Tokio Hotel"; when someone does, should it be included in the article? I believe it should be, as it shows the extent of the band's popularity.

Also, I know that the issue of the Kaulitz twins having their own article has been brought up many times before, but I'd like to further argue that it should be done; for example, last year a popular German TV show named Bill as the #1 most annoying German of 2006, and a couple of nights ago he was crowned #2. And really, there have been so many News spots on German TV about Tom buying a CAR, for goodness' sake. The popularity of the Kaulitz twins not only in their motherland but in many other places around the world is comparable to other super stars such as Justin Timberlake. Think about it. Also noteworthy is German late-night show Freitag Nacht News having a regular skit called "Tokyo Motel" that parodies Bill Kaulitz.

Back on the subject of the Tokio Hotel article itself, it should also be noteworthy that the band donates a designated portion of their profit to a certain charity (I forgot which one, though...). Can someone find a source? Bitteniewieder (talk) 08:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

It would be very hard to verify and seems rather trivial. It would be original research to suggest that number of hits on a search engine = popularity. I highly doubt it will turn out to be true. If you look at the most searched terms over the past 10 years, musical acts rarely register highly, i see no reason that Belgium should be any different. WP:BIO specifies that a person must have been the subject of several none trivial second party publications. As this is the english wikipedia i'm not sure whether their notability in Germany is relavant. If it is titled "Tokyo Motel" then that suggests it is linked to the band not the individuals. Remember we are looking for notability which is not linked the band. --neonwhite user page talk 18:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Forums

May I remind everyone that the discussion page is not a forum for the topic, but a discussion about what should or shouldn't be added/deleted from the article? Read the rules people.Gopherbassist 01:23, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

For user 81.233.2.176

Where are you getting the sales numbers "+600,000 for Schrei and +563,000 for Zimmer 483"? I had included a source of reference previously redirecting to their Bio within their official web site. You still have that the same source (that one says 3 million CDs and DVDs in Germany). You should change the source or if you don't know how to do it just leave the web site here in discussion and I'll change it.--Harout72 04:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I LOL'D

hahaha, "german black metal band". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.160.52.191 (talk) 14:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The links

I suggest to keep the link to official band-sites and remove links to the fanclubs or street team-sites/pages. Syrion 16:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Merger proposal

(This refers to merging Bill and Tom Kaulitz into Tokio Hotel --BNutzer (talk) 11:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC))

Any objections. I think the lack of notability here speaks for itself. --Neon white 15:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the Kaulitz twins are far more popular, well-known and recognisable than the band itself particularly outside of the countries in which Tokio Hotel's releases have been big successes, e.g. UK, USA. Living in the UK myself, I was aware of Tom and Bill Kaulitz ever since I read an article about Tokio Hotel in the London Metro; I didn't recall the band as a whole at all, their single failed to chart here, but they were interviewed and featured independently as the Kaulitz twins. They have been involved in more exploits than just Tokio Hotel, e.g. Arthur and the Invisibles, the Gibson guitar endorsement deals, and more I can't even remember at the mo'. However their popularity in other countries is due largely to their distinct images, particularly Bill's, in terms of style and in general. He has also become a fad/forced-meme on various imageboards and forums, including 4chan. I do think that the article on the Kaulitz twins needs to be expanded with more information, though. There is some available I'm just way too lazy to gather all the sources etc. I'll do it soon and then others can tell me whether they think the addition of all the extra information further merits a seperate article.

I think the twins are far more well-known than say, members of the Rasmus, who each have their own individual articles. I think it would be more logical to merge less-known bands where the artists in them have seperate articles, unless they have other side-projects etc.

-Impamiizgraa 22:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think they are very notable outside of the band, therefore most people looking for info would arrive at this page. If you are correct and there is notability seperate from the band, then their article should reflect that, at the moment 90% of it repeats info that is on this page. Appearances on imageboards isnt really that notable to be honest. There are certainly no sources for that. The Arthur and the Invisibles and Gibson things could easily be said to be linked to the band. The usual step is to merge them and then unmerge should there be more significant text written about them. We can't make the decision based on what other bands have. --Neon white 15:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

A merge would be the best thing to do for now. We can remake the twins article again but with sources asserting notabilty outside of the band. There's no point having an individual article on each member if all of the information can be found on the band article. AngelOfSadness talk 17:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I remember they acted in a German film as toddlers, Verruckt Nacht Die in 1994, then there is the Arthur and the Invisibles, then there is Tom's Gibson guitar deals. I can assure you their notability as individuals extends further than their recognition as just the singer and the guitarist of Tokio Hotel. The extra projects I've listed is also reason enough, in my opinion to keep their article seperate, and considering the trend of their current successes and ventures into USA/UK in the future, I think we'll end up creating the article again, so why bother taking it down in the first place with all this extra information (that I will, so help me god, I will find time to edit). Impamiizgraa 00:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Your assurance isn't really encyclopedic. i think that the Arthur and the Invisibles and Gibson deals aren't linked to the band rather than as individuals outside of the band. If you can add the film then it might give the article a little extra notability but it's still a little light. Whether it is created again in the future has no part in the decision. articles should not be written based on speculation that the topic may receive additional coverage in the future.. See WP:N and WP:NOT#CBALL --Neon white 00:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

#REDIRECT [[Tokio Hotel]]--Dave it (talk) 09:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

That leaves Talk:Bill and Tom Kaulitz orphaned. BNutzer (talk) 11:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

The page hasn't been deleted it just redirects here because any required info about them is likely to be related to the band and therefore can be found here. --Neon white 18:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The content of that Kaulitz page hasn't been merged yet. Im reverting. WP:BOLD Patcat88 (talk) 19:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

That was because most of it was unsourced. --Neon white (talk) 20:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Tokio Hotel Emo

Considering the content of the lyrics and the fashion-style of Tokio Hotel, they aren't a glam-rock-type band. Emo would be the more appropiate Term. 89.53.122.145 18:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

But seeing as the band doesn't consider them punk or emo(They have said this in many interviews), it would be inappropriate to mark the article as such. AngelOfSadness talk 23:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

They have far more in common with glam rock and visual kei, i can't see much to do with emo in their music. --Neon white 23:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

They are desbribed as glam or glam rock on enough sites to have it in the article. [1][2][3][4][5] [6]--Neon white (talk) 20:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Neon white. And in Germany there are enough sources (in German only) which prove that Tokio Hotel themselves have always stated that glam rock is part of their musical identity. --Fromgermany (talk) 16:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

No speculation but verifiable facts only!!!!

Please keep in mind: an encyclopedia is just to state facts and not unsourced, speculative material. And please refrain from adding your own point of view. This is highly un-encyclopedic.
--Fromgermany (talk) 16:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

LISTEN People, its me, who is constantly deleting "glam rock" from TOKIO MOTEL article. I'm being accused of vandalism, but the only thing i'm doing, is not lettting "glam rock" into this article. You cant call TH glam rock, just because one of those *** said that they play GLAM ROCK. If i say that im a king, am i a king? Calling TOkio hotel glam rock, is offensing bands like SLADE or KISS. Think about it for a while!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.14.90.50 (talk) 00:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

If you continue to vandalise the article you will be block from editing it. Genres are not perjorative, they are of no point of view, they are merely a categorisation of popular music. --Neon white (talk) 01:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

But one should keep in mind that there are tons of sources saying they are glam rock and the band consider themselves glam rock. Both of these are good enough reasons to have glam rock in the infobox. The band have also been said to have smidgens of punk rock and more importantly Visual kei and it happens that both of these genres are derivative forms of glam rock AngelOfSadness talk 19:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for stating this so clearly. Sadly I guess this won't convince the IP. --Fromgermany (talk) 00:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

In the glam rock article there is no mention about TH being glam rock. They are also not listed in the list of glam rock bands. All music guide doesn't say that they are glam rock. The fact is that they are not a glam band, but they are alternative rock band. JNCooper —Preceding comment was added at 09:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

They are cited as a glam rock band, what is not contained in other wikipedia article is not a reliable source. All this says is that they should be in those articles. Similarily a website failing to saying they are is not source, allmusicguide is only one questionable source and is certainly not the absolute source for genres. --neonwhite user page talk 20:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Everyone here saying TH are a glam rock band simply have no idea what glam rock sounds like. Your "sources" are no better than any random google hit (btw try googling for Tokio Hotel and glam rock). Show me one critic or musician other than TH themselves that name them glam rock and I'll shut up (I seriously doubt they could name one glam artist themselves, but that's another matter). But as for now glam rock will be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.22.8.97 (talk) 22:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

The source is mtv, it is a verifiable source. Any more deleting of content will likely result in a ban. Your personal opinions are of no interest to this article. --neonwhite user page talk 16:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

First of all this isn't your playground were you can show everyone who is the boss. Secondly your personal opinions has just as much interest and vality as those of everybody else, namely none. And lastly some mtv news board was never considered a reliable (I think that's the word you mean) source, even less if it is in Italian, no offense, but if no German or English site consider a German band Glam Rock, the band simply isn't. I googled for Tokio Hotel and Glam Rock, and the first 20 hits were from either non-English or non-German speaking sites (same issue as with the Italian mtv page), this page and a few sites where TH and Glam Rock had been incoherently found. If you continue adding Glam Rock as a genre without a reliable proof (forget verifiable, anything found on the internet is verifiable, reliability is what's important) and threaten other users you might as well be banned for violating etiquette. Why is this issue so important to you anyway? Nobody aside from yourself said they were Glam Rock, and you do not own this page, more less this site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath (talk • contribs) 19:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia decides it's content on the basis of verifiability. I suggest you read the policy and guidelines carefully before making any future edits. The sources provided are perfectly verifiable, the language of sources does not change that. This has been decide by a consensus of editors based on the multitude of sources listed above. I highly recommend reading how to edit in a civil manner. --neonwhite user page talk 19:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Read them yourself, it states that verifiable means that you should be able to check the information from a reliable source, which you can't. You are the one threatening people, so stay civil yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath (talk • contribs) 19:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Mtv is a relaible source according to all policy. I have made no personal threats. --neonwhite user page talk 19:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay I can understand a certain bullheaded indivudual considers mtv word law. Do yourself a favour and listen to a real Glam rock artist. Your childish behavior can only mean that you are an immature kid that can't face the fact that he likes pop music. Do not see this as an insult, it is more a promt to prove me wrong. I will refrain from editing, but promise me to listen to a real Glam rock artist and compare their music to TH. You will realise you (and mtv) are wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath (talk • contribs) 15:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Mtv is a verifiable sources according to wikipedia policy. As pointed out personal opinions do not matter. --neonwhite user page talk 18:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh please just shut up. Mtv never was a reliable source, according to any policy (I checked). Read the policy yourself, and have a dictionary at hand because you obviously haven't understood enough to be an objective and unbiased editor. No German site ever sayed they were glam rock, and I doubt you speak German any way, so why do you have the authority? This whole glam rock junk is your personal opinion anyway, which is just as out of place as anybody elses. If you had read your so "reliable" source, you would have see that TH call themselves glam rock. So if they call themselves techno or heavy metal or rap are they techno, heavy metal or rap? Don't you dare send me any quotas from wiki-policy again without reading them yourself and drop that holier-than-though attitude. You never even made the attempt to understand anyone elses arguments or point of view, which is disgustingly selfish and intolerant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath (talk • contribs) 22:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Mtv is the biggest music channel in the world, it is known to be WP:V for music facts. As has been pointed out early, we don't prove negatives, it doesn't matter where it hasnt been said just that relaible sources say it and the consensus here was to keep it. You do not have any valid arguement only a personal view which is not relevant and not wanted on this article. You are on your final warning. --neonwhite user page talk 00:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you ever read WP:V, because you would know that any "source" found on the internet is verifiable. If the source is only found on the internet it needs to be reliable. And according to WP:V a (Italian) mtv news board isn't reliable, and it sure isn't verifiable to the public reading the English TH wikipage. Find an English source or at least a German one, else contibute to the Italian or French page. I haven't seen you submit pop-punk or alternative rock as genre (again check AMG). So the only reason for your persistent misinformation must be a personal one, as you don't go on submitting any genre found by some site you label "verifiable". Ban me for all I care, it doesn't excuse your behavior or make your contibution any more true. I had and still have valid arguments (btw nice spelling) and you either never understood them or you simply ignored them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath (talk • contribs) 10:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

To quote WP:V Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. MTV is considered verifiable as a source and has been used in many articles. WP:V at no point mentions specific sites. Sources do not have to be in english. I have not seen any articles that say pop-punk or alternative rock, it is not up to be to add those. Please read the policy. It is galringly obviously you have not. --neonwhite user page talk 17:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Neonwhite, you're so damn wrong here, but you just won't admit it. Let's vote about Tokio Hotel being glam rock. I'm saying that they are not a glam band. If MTV says so, that is the only website on internet that has that opinion and it's wrong. Slade, T.Rex, Alice Cooper and Sweet were glam rock. What same does TH have in their music as those bands? Nothing! They are not glam rock and that's a fact you ignorant little child. Everyone who knows something about the history of rock will say that Tokio Hotel is not glam rock. Maybe neo-glam or post-glam, but NOT glam rock! ---JNCooper 19:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Your personal views are not relevant here. There are multiple reliable sources here. You are not one of them. Please read WP:CIVIL on how to discuss matters in a civil way. --neonwhite user page talk 19:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I have no knowledge in whether Tokio Hotel should be classed as Glam Rock or not. But trying to read this discussion neonwhite is actually trying to discuss this matter in a civilised manner (irregarding if he's right or not), which most of you others don't, if you would like to make your point believable try not to call people "ignorant little child". Please at least try to read WP:CIVIL before insulting people again. If I still would try to add my own opinion in the matter I would disagree with Tokio Hotel being called Glam Rock, though I don't really know if italian MTV should be classed as a verifiable source or not. And there is no way to argument against neonwhite if you have no real arguments against the use of these sites as sources. My opinion on that matter will remain neutral. --Qszet (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't find any reason why mtv should not be considered reliable, it's the biggest music channel in the world, it has a distinct history. What we have to remember is that wikipedia represents verified info not facts. All genres are subjective and the infobox merely reflects a number of genres that a band is known as. Regardless of personal views. --neonwhite user page talk 03:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Mtv is not reliable (and gratz you finally realisd that it has to be reliable and not verfiable) because it has no aspiration whatsoever to describe, analyse and categorise music. It is just the homepage of a tv-network, which originally did nothing but distribute music videos. You will never find critics or reviews on mtv. For instance mtv.de (Germany) once described avril lavigne as punk rock, HIM as love metal (for the record it isn't even a genre), dimmu borgir as shock-rock, cradle of filth as black metal, little richard as rock, etc. Now I can't say wether mtv.it is any better, but considering that the majority of wikipedias users do not speak Italian, mtv.it is not verifiable anyway. Face it, mtv will say anything that goes well with the targeted audience (and you might be the best example that the practice works). It is not a personal opinion (an opinion would be Tokio Hotel sucks/rules or is pop-rock, alternative rock, pop etc), but an irrefutable fact, Tokio Hotel is simply not glam rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath (talk • contribs) 15:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

On what ridiculous grounds do you suspect mtv the biggest and most well known music channel in the world to not be reliable? verifiablity is the standard that all sources must adhere to. MTV publishes many article and reviews, many of which are used as sources in countless articles. If you wish to discuss changes in WP:V policy then do it on that page. Genres are define by the media. Language of a source is irrelevant to it's verifiable. Please cease pushing your absurd personal POV beyond all reason. I remind you that wikipedia is not based on your view but on that of verifiable sources which includes the media whether you agree with them or not has no bearing on it and does not allow a source to be discarded. --neonwhite user page talk 18:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Upps, don't you lose your cool. First of all, mtv is not the biggest music channel in the world unless you give me a source:). Secondly, language is important, or what would you do, if I show you a, say, (reliable) Russian site, stating that Tokio Hotel isn't glam rock (couldn't verify that now, could you). Thirdly, mtv never published reviews, the closest thing that gets to a review is perhaps a notice containing information about succesful a record sells, or how much the kids love 'em and mtv-news is just as reliable as The Sun, Bildzeitung and The National Enquirer. To my understanding (my Italian is quite limited, but nevertheless I tried to translate it) your source isn't talking about the music anyway. Wikipedia has the aspiriation of being composed of facts, not every claim found on some site deemed verifiable by someone. I understand you refuse to use your own brain/common sense and rather quote guidelines, but know that your "contribution" does not improve wikipedia in the least. Noone ever supported your assessment of the genre, and you yourself couldn't back your claims (considering you know they are more influenced by visual key and glam rock than emo you must at least believe you have some knowledge about music), much less deliver a review that describes them as glam rock. Lastly, I would like to know how old you are. You don't need to answer if you feel it's too personal, but this whole issue would be a lot easier to handle (for me personally), if I knew you are only an immature child that will probably grow out of this phase in a year or two and then remove that genre.

US Releases

The band have released two singles in the US. The first had "Scream" and "Ready, Set, Go!" and I think it had no title. The cover said simply "Tokio Hotel" and used the cover art from "Schrei: So Laut du Kannst". That one was released in Fall 07 (October, I think) and was available at Hot Topic only. "Scream America" was released in December and is available from numerous stores and on iTunes. It has "Scream" and the "Ready, Set, Go!" remix. I wanted to make sure the page distinguished between the two, as it seemed to confuse and condense both releases into the "Scream America" release. I retained the currently unsourced statements about the IMF and the "Scream" album's specific release date from the previous edit. NDow (talk) 19:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)