Jump to content

Talk:Sum 41

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 74.69.64.52 (talk) at 19:31, 15 May 2010 (→Pop Punk or Punk Rock). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleSum 41 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
August 25, 2008Good article nomineeListed
November 11, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Good article

Template:FAOL Template:WP1.0 Template:Maintained

Former band members

I've searched around and have found absolutely nothing about Mark Spicoluk or Marc Costanzo ever being in Sum 41 and the only thing about Richard Roy is from a fansite that has no citations either. In this youtube video he says that they went through around 9 bassists before getting Cone... so yeah. If anyone can get any information on these guys it'd be cool. DrewD007 (talk) 16:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Punk or Punk Rock

I hate genres, its genrallizing a music group. It seems the main quip in genres right now is whether the band is pop punk or punk rock. I believe that punk rock best defines the band. If you think differently state why. DrewD007 04:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe its just me but as of 2007 and underclass hero, they are hardly punk rock. Foreeye 10:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sum 41 is even more punk rock than any of their previous albums. Deryck even said so. Just listen to some of the new songs. Tim Y (talk) 14:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know it was over a year ago when that was said, but I just need to say this. Saying that you are punk rock does not make you punk rock. Tithonfury (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But really who cares what genre they are? They are constantly in change and sound entirely different on each new album. Thats why I listen to them. For christs sake listen to so long goodbye and then no reason or the bitter end. A world of difference. then listen to in too deep and then mr. amsterdam and know that roughly 1 year passed between those songs. When you start arguing about pointless genres like pop/skate/whatever-punk you are REALLY becoming a wikigeek. And dont. Listen to their great music instead! Foreeye 15:47, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they're rather emocore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.201.169.202 (talk) 20:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, alright. Why don't you actually listen to their music, and if you still believe they're emocore, find a reliable source for that assumption. Timmeh! 20:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this band is pop punk.--Greenday21 (talk) 22:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Greenday21[reply]

The band has multiple genres. Pop Punk. Alternative Metal. Punk Rock. Just deal with the fact that some bands have more than one official genres. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 03:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
and also, for those arguing saying that "Sum 41 isn't Pop Punk!", Sum 41 (along with Bands like Blink-182 )Invented the genre known as Pop Punk in the late 90's and early 00's. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 03:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, because pop punk bands like The Mr T Experience, Screeching Weasel, Sweet baby, Brent's T.V., NoFX, etc. certainly weren't around before Blink 182 and Sum 41. Seriously, do you just make stuff up? Pop punk was a well established genre before either of the bands you mentioned even started. If you want to go even further, there's always bands like 7 Seconds.66.207.82.96 (talk) 11:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Their first 2 albums were completely pop punk, and there are some pop punk elements in all their music, even the alternative metal album Chuck. 82.41.209.185 (talk) 21:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear God!! What is this ofense? Sum 41 is PUNK ROCK people. Please don't kill the music, pop rock bands are like The Jonas brothers or Mcfly. And the album Chuck contents a lot of politicals issues. They created fast, hard-edged music, typically with short songs, stripped-down instrumentation, they got everything to say at least that they're more of punk rock than pop. PLEASE change the term. I'm not even agree with article Punk rock which says that they are part of the 'revival punk'. I really don't understand what they are talking about. Please change. --Josema18 (talk) 00:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How cute. Someone who obviously thinks that punk rock was born with Green Day. More punk than pop? Possibly the band would even disagree.74.69.64.52 (talk) 19:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with opening paragraph

As of July 23 2007, Sum 41 has 5 studio albums, and someone really should expand the section on the new studio album.

67.161.36.19 20:00, 25 July 2007 (UTC)RJ[reply]

Half Hour Of Power is an EP, as it is only half an hour (d'oh). Foreeye 10:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i think that they are still punk rock. walking disaster, king of contradiction, Underclass hero, Count your last blessings [etc] are punk rock. User:kevinhwashere

Or maybe it is a full album, I dont know Foreeye 09:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of their albums previous to Underclass Hero were only about half an hour. But idk much about their pre-AKNF days. ╦ﺇ₥₥€Ԋ (talk) 14:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
HHOP was actually only 24 minutes long or so. The last track had 6 minutes of silence tacked on, because 24 minutes of POWER! just didn't fly...- -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 04:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name?

Is there some meaning behind the band's name? I've heard that some people think "42" is the answer to life (whatever that means)...Does this have some influence on the band's name, like it's just off? MotherFerginPrincess (talk) 14:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genres

What the heck is everyones problem with genres. It just keeps changing. I personally think that if people are that obsessed with the genres, that they should know have to state a reliable source PROVING that that is the actual genre for Sum 41. For example if it says anywhare on Sum 41's website they are (genre) then put the source on the talk page.
Does anyone agree? -Posted by:ΡЦЛќ41t̪ on 21:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.myspace.com/sum41 it says the sum 41 genres. rock, punk, alternative User:kevzilla8

Aye screw genres Foreeye 15:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Influence Green Day

Saying Chuck is the album where you can most here a Green Day influenceis bollocks it's probably the last of their albums youd compare with Green Day as it pisses all over anything billie joe can play on guitar.

Mwhaha yeah he really is a crap guitarist For comparison listen to green day plays heavy metal and sum 41 plays heavy metal A LOT of heavy metal fans said they would stop listening to metal and start listening to sum 41 after that show Foreeye 15:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And sums recorded that piece after 2-3 years from their first ep, green day must have been at least 6 or so, but then deryck had his faithful dave to back him up then *sob*. Foreeye 15:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sourced Genres

Someone needs to stop all these ips vandalizing the page and removing sourced genres. They need to be blocked if they won't stop, or someone needs to semi-protect the page please. Tim Y (talk) 22:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried (At least 10 times) to get this page forever semi-protected so anonymous vandals won't change the genre, but they keep saying "Not enough recent vandalism to justify protection at this time."The Spooky One 10:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Steve or Stevo

During the 2007-present section, the name Stevo appears constantly. is that a typo?

No, it's not a typo. That's probably his most popular nickname. It's what most fans call him. Though Deryck and Cone just call him Steve. Timmeh! 20:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget Stevo32.. Or has that worn out by now? - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 20:21, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New picture

Can someone find a new picture to put up of the band? The article needs one. Make sure it's free use (concert picture,etc.) so it doesn't get removed like the last one. If anyone has gone to one of their concerts recently, you could upload a picture you took, if you took any. Timmeh! 00:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put one up, its horrible though. I think its just barely better than none at all. Sadly, this is probably the best one i took (out of ~35) Random89 20:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least we have something up now. If you happen to find any that are better, don't hesitate to put it in. Tim 23:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many different genres

i dont think that sum 41 is pop rock becuase then they would sound like fall out boy they are better described as hardcore punk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spagett (talk • contribs) 00:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hardcore punk is an entirely different genre that includes bands like Black Flag and Circle Jerks, that type of music is much more fast paced and not as radio friendly as what Sum41 plays.Hoponpop69 (talk) 23:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something i noticed

just today i noticed that up until Chuck, Steve Jocz was on the cover of every album, is this worth mentioning anywhere? - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 02:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't think so, wouldn't say the information is significant to the development of the article. Seems almost like trivia.  Orfen  T • C 03:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I also noticed that every single one of there studio albums charted #1 in Canada. I beleive THAT is worth mentioning. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 03:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, just find reliable sources and an appropriate place to put it unless it is already listed somewhere.  Orfen  T • C 03:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrites and Genres

While the article for Sum 41 is a great article, the corresponding articles for each band member are terrible and need to be re-written. See Deryck Whibley, Steve Jocz, Jason McCaslin & Dave Baksh. They sound like they were written by a small child... (no offense to small children)

also, as for the genres, who says you can only have 3 genres in the infobox? i propose adding "Alternative Metal" to the list and in small text next to it say (2003-2005) and for Pop Punk have (whenever-2003, 2006-present). Or we should just go back to the Disputed Genres link to the genres section that it was at a while back. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 05:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the genre format in the infobox now good? It links to the musical styles section and looks a lot neater than when it had citations in it. The music styles and influences section still needs citations in it though. Timmeh! 15:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's good the way it is now. also, i think the current news section (or whatever it's called) needs to be updated to present tense. And it should also be mentioned that Sum 41 (after like 3 shows) is done touring for this summer. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 21:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nomination

i think it's up for it. It's a Featured article on Italian Wikipedia, so lets nominate it for GA AND FA here.

I recommend using a translator and checking out the Italian version here . Somebody should take that chart the use for the lineups and use it over here on the english article. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 11:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to point out that the GA criteria is listed here. I know just by a quick skim that it wouldn't pass criteria 2. There are quite a bit of things that are not cited. I'd suggest going and doing that first and then request a peer review to see what else can be done.  Orfen  T • C 04:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would the Maximum Sum 41 CD be a reliable source? it has a ton of facts on it that are unsourced in this article. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 07:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be helpful if you could provide a link of some sort so I can see information about the CD. Without knowing anything about it I'd say not to probably use it. If it's on a CD I'd think there would be a reliable source somewhere else with the information. Not everyone would have access to the CD and can check the facts provided by the CD. I'd say search the information you wish to source and the odds are there would probably be some sources available in print which would be reliable and provide the same information.  Orfen  T • C 18:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
it can be found at http://www.amazon.com/Maximum-Sum-41/dp/B000060K6U - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 19:14, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looking just at the cover of the CD it says that it is an "Unauthorized Biography" and it says it includes interviews. I'd suggest possibly trying to find these interviews in print somewhere. I'm looking at this page and I can't seem to find an author either. It says it is an audio book and it also says that the CD isn't made by the band's label. Being unauthorized I'd say not to use it. The band probably had little to no involvement with making it and I would think that you would be able to find the information you need cited in a different source.  Orfen  T • C 20:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sum 41/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hello everyone, I have decided to do the GA review for this article. I have scanned the article from time to time and have found some things that need to be addressed before we go on.

  • There are several formatting errors including:
    • There are several bolded words throughout the article that do not need to be bolded such as "DeeVeeDee", "Underclass Hero", and a second "Sum 41". Keep in mind albums and DVDs should be italicized and song names should contain quotations around them. Done
    • References are not formatted correctly in two ways:
  1. The reference must come straight after the period. It must not contain a space after or be before the period. Done
  2. The {{Cite}} template is not used. Citations need to include titles, authors, dates and other information found in the template. A quick way to do this is you can turn on a button in your preferences where you can quickly enter in all the information and a citation is then provided for you. You may also go to this website as well. Correctly formatted citations is a must.  Done
  • Another aspect that needs to be addressed is the lead section. Please look at other GA bands for examples such as Green Day. It needs to be long enough paragraph-wise to summarize the subject and it needs to explain why the subject is notable such as certain awards they have won or their charting positions. Again look at other articles for examples. All sales numbers and awards should have references as well. There are also capitalization problems in the lead such as the "f" in "Far" and the "p" in "Platinum" should be lower cased. Not all the numbers of studio albums and EPs need to be listed but if you are listing smaller numbers like that they should be spelt out fully.
  • Look at the Underclass Hero section and remove insignificant information. There are one sentence paragraphs, either find a way to combine or expand those with another paragraph or remove them. This section could also use some more citations. Especially where it says a press release was made. That needs to have a citation to it.
  • The Internet Videos section also could use some more citations towards the end of the first paragraph. This also contains one sentence paragraphs. Look to either expand, combine, or remove if insignificant. Done
  • There are a few things that need citations, I will mark these things for you so you can find things on them. Remember to correctly format them. Everything must be verifiable. Done

Those are some things you can work on for right now. If there are any questions please be sure to ask and I will help as best I can.  Orfen  T • C 04:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked on formatting the references; got about 3/4 of them; found sources for the things needing them; removed stuff i couldn't find sources for. Now i need some help expanding the lead.- -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 01:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright I see some pretty good work so far. I have marked out the things that are completed. The stuff not marked out yet still needs to be done. Remember to correctly place all the references as well. There are still quite a few references that aren't placed after the period or there is a space after the period.
For the lead section read WP:LEAD for more information on the lead section. Again, look at Green Day for some ideas. Their lead contains some sales numbers for some albums and some awards they have won or been nominated for. You could contain some charting history. Those are just some ideas. I probably wouldn't keep the numbers saying how much albums or EPs or other works they made. It's rather insignificant but rather touch on the more important aspects of their career and summarize it in the lead.
Also as another thing that needs to be done there are a couple sentences in parenthesis. They are unneeded and should be implemented into the paragraphs some other way.
Good work so far but more work needs to be done.  Orfen  T • C 17:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Finished the references; they should be all good now. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 23:12, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've also worked on expanding the lead; listing the awards they've been nominated for. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 00:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, very good so far. Everything is formatted correctly but now the article needs some writing work. The lead already looks better but it still needs some work. I wouldn't mention how they got their name, that's already mentioned in the next section. I'd also just completely remove this sentence: "Since then, the band has released four studio albums, one live album, five DVDs, one Demo tape, four EPs, & 17 singles." It's unnecessary and you should instead touch on their most important work with Island Records. Which record sold the most? Which record had the most acclaim? Which record sparked their popularity? That is the stuff that needs to be addressed in the lead section. There are still some more things that need to be done besides the lead section. There are a couple sections you might be able to add to make the article cover all aspects of the topic. Here are some ideas for a couple other sections:
  • Is there any criticism of the band or its music? This is not mandatory if there isn't any but I would be surprised if there isn't any.
  • I'd suggest creating a related projects section summarizing the band's other projects such as their side projects. Maybe remove the internet videos section and combine it with the related projects section.
Also, the Chuck and Underclass Hero sections have some things that still need to be worked on. The Chuck section has a couple one sentence paragraphs. Those need to be combined with the other paragraphs or expanded. The Underclass Hero section has some pretty short paragraphs towards the end of it. Those need to be combined or expanded. You could actually put the whole thing about Cone interviewing Slash in the related projects section and then remove it from Underclass Hero. You could also combine all information about the singles/releases in the Underclass Hero section (March of the Dogs, Underclass Hero, Walking Disaster, With Me). That way the paragraphs won't be as short and all related information will be together. It's all right next to each other anyway.
That's all I have for now, good work. Just work on the lead, adding the related projects section, and then work on the Chuck and Underclass Hero section. The article is on its way.  Orfen  T • C 15:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked on expanding the lead to the best of my ability, also cleaned up the 1 sentence paragraphs and made a new section that combines collaborations and internet videos. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 19:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You've done really well with the rest of the article but the collaboration section now has a lot of one sentence paragraphs. That must be addressed. Also the lead could use a little work still. It could probably flow a little better. Perhaps ask someone who has a nice amount of experience writing to look through it for you. The rest of the article is looking good though. The musical style section needs a little more work though. It needs more citations. There can't be original research when saying what a band sounds like. That must be sourced. Other than that it looks pretty good.  Orfen  T • C 22:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked a bit more on the lead; found a couple more sources for the musical styles section; reworked the collaboration section to remove one sentence paragraphs.. now what? - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 21:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright I have done some formatting a capitalization changes and notice you need a couple more citations for the lead. I have looked through it all thoroughly now and there are a couple citations that need changing. References 7, 10, 11, 27, and 34 all need to be changed. They are either message board posts or a Myspace. Perhaps look for MTV articles or another website because you're using them for TRL information and such and I'm sure you'd be able to find that information elsewhere. Reference 44 is also rather questionable. How reliable is the biography? What are his affiliations with the band? Where did the information come from? That all needs to be answered to know if the source is reliable. I also added two more places that need citations in the style and influence section.  Orfen  T • C 01:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the disputed subgenres is going to have to go. Look on a website such as allmusic for the band and then put the genres found there in the infobox. All genres need to be sourced. Also even if the genre is "disputed" if it is sourced it will have to be included due to no original research.  Orfen  T • C 01:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Today i found some images on flickr that can be used on wikipedia; so there in there now. Is this process of reviewing over yet? I don't really see what else i can do to make the article any better. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 23:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Every picture in the article still needs a fair use rationale.  Orfen  T • C 23:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure they don't have them? do they need a fair use if the image is Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.0? There were old images in the article that were removed because they were all copvio's but the ones in there now i uploaded using a flickr bot. What exactly do i need to do to them? - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 00:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, my mistake then. I see that they are under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.0 license. Taking another look over everything while the forum citations were removed that still leaves some content unsourced. Such as: "...which is referred to by fans as Rock Out with Your Cock Out." That one needs to be sourced. I don't see anything else though. If you are going to attribute a name to the demo tapes then the name has to be sourced.  Orfen  T • C 02:04, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even though I know it's true (since i'm a fan and me and other fans refer to it as that), i'm removing the ROWYCO from the article; becuase i can't find a reliable source for it. - -[The Spooky One] | [t c r] 20:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I passed the article. Good job.  Orfen  T • C 21:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Back-up web sources

Since this article uses a fair number of online sources, I would suggest archiving them at Webcite so there will be back-ups in case the pages expire. Ink Runner (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reasoning for name and Thacker

  1. Can someone please source the statement about where the name of the band came from?
  2. Does Thacker belong in line-ups? Enigmamsg 02:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Done.

2. Yes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.179.192 (talk) 01:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should Tom Thacker be 2009 to present rather than 2007, as he was only a touring member back then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.177.85 (talk) 15:28, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genere

who was the stupido qho put ska punk!!!!!!!! i changed it again lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.165.198.220 (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't make personal attacks toward another editor, no matter how wrong you think them to be. Just reverting their edit, explaining why it was wrong, it enough. Timmeh! 00:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kaspir

The article currently states: The band was originally a NOFX cover band named Kaspir; they changed their name to Sum 41 for a Supernova show on September 28, 1996. This is supported by two citations, yet when I check those sources, they say nothing about this. ...unless I am missing something? Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 01:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

40 Million Albums

Where is the proof that the band has sold 40 million albums becuase it sounds ridiculous

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}}

Olympic Closing Ceremony

On February 28, 2010, SUM 41 gave a performance near the middle of the concert portion of the 2010 Olympic Games Closing ceremony performing "Burn It To the Ground".

-Stereo Soul —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stereo soul (talk • contribs) 06:11, 1 March 2010

 Not done: Welcome and thanks. Please provide an independent source for this factual change. Celestra (talk) 20:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sum_41&oldid=362308551"