Jump to content

Talk:Neighborhoods (Blink-182 album)

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Punkbassist31 (talk | contribs) at 23:11, 28 September 2011 (→‎Edit request from 216.241.196.39, 15 September 2011). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAlbums Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconPunk music Unassessed (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Punk music, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Regarding the break-up

Before anyone gets to discussing about whether we should discuss the band's break-up, in my opinion we should. There has been a lot happen since blink-182 and there is a lot to cover. Granted, we must cover it quickly, but I believe I've accurately done so here. I'll add more about the band's reformation and more about the side-projects later. --Thardin12 (talk), July 15, 2011

Incorporating a background section is supported by WikiProject Albums. However, I feel that this section is too lengthy as it stands, and it looks like a lot of the information was simply paraphrased from Blink-182. I think if a section like this is too exist, it should be sorter and should use Template:Further to link to the relevant section at Blink-182. Fezmar9 (talk) 13:43, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing

Does anyone have a source for the track listing? It should probably be deleted until one a source is found. Shadowhanz05 (talk) 22:51, 15 July 2011

My understanding, and the article supports this, is that Blink-182 will turn in the finished copy of Neighborhoods into their label on July 31. So even if this supposed track listing is actually reflecting whatever stage the album is presently, the label has the final say on track ordering, so there's no way this is the finalized and official track listing. That, plus the fact the only sources I can find are social networking sites not affiliated with the band and fan forums which far from qualify as reliable sources. It was the responsibility of whoever added the material to also provide a source, and he/she failed to do so. Fezmar9 (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Mark Hoppus confirmed on his Tumblr 'Q&A' page recently that any and all track listings floating around in the wild are all fake and he urged readers to not believe any track lists until one comes from the band itself. The only other song beside 'Up All Night' that has a confirmed title is a song called 'Even If She Falls', which Mark Hoppus announced on his Google+ page. Still, though, it was just the title of a song that the band members had received a mix for and doesn't necessarily mean the song will be on the the upcoming album. Definitely a good idea to just wait it out as opposed to publishing song title rumors. Stoptheradio (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to Mark Hoppus, the four songs off the new album they have played so far on tour are "Up All Night", "Hearts All Gone", "After Midnight" and "Ghost On The Dancefloor". Although the order of these cannot be confirmed, the fact that they will be on the album can be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigc2 (talkcontribs) 19:40, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's nice. We're waiting for a full, verifiable track listing before we start a section on Tracks. Otherwise all we'll have are anons & SPAs adding "possible tracks" every 5 minutes. In fact that's exactly why the article is currently protected. Obviously we already have content discussing "Up All Night"; other tracks that can be reliably sourced (preferably through third-party sources) can also be discussed in the prose. But no tracklist section until there's a full, confirmed tracklist. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:46, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.altpress.com/news/entry/official_tracklisting_for_blink_182s_neighborhoods_revealed_by_mark_hoppusMrkite6270 (talk) 03:04, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mrkite6270, please see the discussion below (#Track listing not the correct order?). That posting is based on a screenshot of an itunes playlist that does not state that it is the album's track listing. --IllaZilla (talk) 06:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Track 6 Typo

On this page it incorrectly states Track 6 as "Even If She FAILS" when it's actually "Even If She FALLS", as evident in the source provided here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProjectPowerless (talkcontribs) 18:32, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed --IllaZilla (talk) 18:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deluxe edition

Why were the bonus tracks removed from the track listing section? they are listed in the same source as the main track listing section... --58.168.73.125 (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, you're right.  Fixed --IllaZilla (talk) 16:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing not the correct order?

Here is your source. --60.229.178.130 (talk) 20:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The track listing is properly referenced to a reliable source. Leave it alone unless/until a different tracklist is reported and can be reliably sourced. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that AbsolutePunk article is the source of the Alternative Press reference currently being used for the track listing here. So if the source of Alternative Press' article made an error, then by extension so did Alternative Press. Fezmar9 (talk) 22:02, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to Absolutepunk, the original source is this document from UMG, the parent company of their record label. The allegation of error comes from (ugh) Twitter. Given that information on this album has changed almost weekly since it was first announced that they were recording it, I'm inclined to leave it as-is unless and until the album comes out or a better source presents itself, since the info comes from the company who is publishing the album. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
the new track listing order? [1] --121.218.80.253 (talk) 03:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We do not cite social networking sites. Wikipedia relies on "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". We have multiple such sources (Alternative Press and Allmusic) already cited in the article. --IllaZilla (talk) 17:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alternative Press posted this new track listing that's been floating around the web as the "official tracklisting for the deluxe edition" just this morning. Fezmar9 (talk) 18:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, it's sourced to a screenshot of an itunes playlist. This is probably the third "official" tracklist to be reported in as many weeks. As usual, the information changes almost daily. Let's leave it be until the confirmed track listing is widely published and/or the thing's released. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think the track listing section should be blanked or commented out for the time being. As you point out, this is probably the third official track listing that can be sourced by third-party published articles. And the details do seem to change almost daily now. I know that the first sentence of WP:V gets thrown around a lot, but when it comes to upcoming album articles, I don't see a point in posting information that's potentially false—even if it is verifiable—when the information will be known with 100% certainty on a known date. On September 27, we will be able to post the correct track listing for Neighborhoods with 100% certainty. Between now and then, why bother arguing which "official" track listing is authentic? Fezmar9 (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is also no guarantee that the screenshot represents the track listing. It's a screenshot of an itunes playlist, nothing more. It doesn't say "this is the track listing" or anything like that. I can arrange songs in a playlist in any order I choose, that doesn't mean it represents a physical album in its finished form. I respectfully ask all editors to refrain from changing the track listing while the article is protected, and to discuss the matter here rather than continually changing it. --IllaZilla (talk) 17:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds reasonable. I mean yeah it just could be in random order, due to the fact it's playlist, nor does any captions suggests it's the actual order. --124.179.37.74 (talk) 20:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The itunes playlist you refering to was posted by a member of the band, why would he post it if it wasnt the actual track listing, also aside from the fact that is in order, if that doesnt prove it to you, each aong is labeled at the begining with the fucking track number! are you blind dude? why do you want other blink182 fans to see incorrect information, whats wrong with you im gonna file a complaint somehow to fucking wikimedia. stop changing it you fuck
By the way man, your what is wrong with Wikipedia and your the reason why teachers and other people do not believe its a reliable source, you are knowingly posting incorrect information. Who is more reliable to you...a journalist who doesnt know his ass from a hole in the ground...or an actual fucking member of the band who posted this picture on not just Facebook, but also his google+ page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uafausti (talkcontribs) 07:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An iTunes playlist is not the same thing as an album track listing, and when there is no caption or any other text stating that it is the track listing then it is original research to call it such. Also please be civil and stop the personal attacks. --IllaZilla (talk) 07:57, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
People wouldn't attack you like this if you didn't police this page like you owned it. I provide a link with a primary source from Mark Hoppus, who had stated that the original track list was wrong and that he would provide the real one. You deleted it. The one you reverted it to was DEFINITELY incorrect, as Hoppus declared it so. Therefore, the edits I made were, if not correct, at least more likely to be so than the track list you reverted it to. You say be civil, well you don't have to call someone a "fucker" to be uncivil. You're being just as rude. 67.9.153.200 (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does not matter if the track list is sourced or not. Multiple sources could say multiple things about it, with each being true at the time of publication, but still not accurate to whatever the album's final track list will be. This is the reason we have WP:CRYSTAL, and specifically point #5, which says, in part Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content. On this basis I have hidden the track list; it can be corrected (if necessary) and unhidden when the album is released. Please do not restore it -- just wait a bit for the real thing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd Call the person who made the album's statement the "real thing" but hey, you're probably right that it's best to just leave the track list off for a few more weeks just to avoid more of this. 67.9.153.200 (talk) 21:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that Hoppus never made a "statement", really. He never did an interview or wrote to one of the publications that reported on the track listing and said "hey, this is wrong, please retract the story". He just said something in passing on Twitter. And he never stated that the image he posted was the final tracklist either; he just posted a screenshot of an itunes playlist. with no caption or explanatory text. Does that image represent the final track listing? Probably, but the standard here is verifiability, not truth. We don't cite tweets, as Twitter is a piss-poor source as far as an encyclopedia's concerned, nor can we make a claim about the image that the image itself does not directly support (eg. "this is the album's final track listing"). On the other hand, the previously-reported track listing comes from a marketing document from UMG, the parent company who is publishing the album. Given all of this, I think that removing the track list for the time being was the right move. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is Amazon a "piss-poor" source, just wondering? [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlylemiii (talkcontribs) 03:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. More the to the point, Amazon is a shopping website, and we don't generally cite shopping sites; we cite news publications, music journals, etc. (see WP:RS for guidance on sources). It's certainly no more reliable than Alternative Press or Allmusic, both of whom have published the track listing that UMG put out. --IllaZilla (talk) 04:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
good lord, man. you are hands down the worst user here, and i say this from seeing your "contributions" to a number of pages over the last year or two, not just this one. you're a totally irrational bully on here, i can't imagine what you're like in real life. grow up, please. 68.45.223.21 (talk) 16:34, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please be civil and lay off the personal attacks. There is a consensus (via discussions here at at ANI) to leave the tracklist out until the release date. Upholding consensus, and asking for better sources than shopping sites, is not "irrational bullying". --IllaZilla (talk) 17:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So is the track list here for good now? Also, Snake Charmer is typo'd. ProjectPowerless (talk) 17:13, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is being left out until the release date. --IllaZilla (talk) 18:38, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alight, I think we can put the track listing back because it has been released in Australia.--121.212.16.220 (talk) 19:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing confirmed?

On the Australian iTunes it is available for pre-order. for the standard edition, and the deluxe edition --121.212.16.220 (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See the above section #Track listing not the correct order?. There was also an ANI conversation, and the consensus was to leave out the track listing until the album is released, due to conflicting sources. We're not the news and we have no deadline, so there's no rush. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

iTunes Pre-Order

iTunes has actually started Neighborhoods pre orders for the deluxe addition. The tracks are as follows:

1.Ghost on the Dance Floor 2. Natives 3. Up All Night 4. After Midnight 5. Snake Charmer 6. Heart’s All Gone (Interlude) 7. Heart’s All Gone 8. Wishing Well 9. Kaleidoscope 10. This Is Home 11. MH 4.18.2011 12. Love Is Dangerous 13. Fighting the Gravity 14. Even If She Falls

iTunes seems like a viable source of information, so why can't we make a track listing for the Deluxe Edition at least? --ProjectPowerless (talk) 15:22, 13 September 2011

See the various discussions above. Consensus was to leave the track listing out until the release date, due to conflicting sources. I don't see how itunes is any better of a source than amazon. --IllaZilla (talk) 17:48, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see where you're coming from. Completely unrelated, but wouldn't it make more sense to list "Reception" and "Supporting Tours" under release? As done here ProjectPowerless (talk) 19:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that these should be sub-sections of "Release". The supporting tours started well before the release and will likely continue well after, and Reception almost always has its own section. Most of the articles in Category:FA-Class Album articles are structured that way, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Article body seems to read that they should have their own sections. --IllaZilla (talk) 20:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 216.241.196.39, 15 September 2011

Neighborhoods Tracklist According to itunes pre-order 1. Ghosts on The Dancefloor 2. Natives 3. Up All Night 4. After Midnight 5. Snake Charmer 6. Hearts All Gone Interlude 7. Hearts All Gone 8. Wishing Well 9. Kaleidascope 10. This Is Home 11. MH 4.18.2011 12. Love Is Dangerous

Deluxe edition tracks

13. Fighting The Gravity 14. Even If She Falls

^ this is the tracklisting for neighborhoods deluxe edition i got it from a uk friend so update it to show people the songs oh and as well as that thats the DELUXE edition itunes has it on its pre orders for irefutable proof of it so update the albums tracklisting

216.241.196.39 (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined See the numerous threads on this already on this talk page. Edit request templates are not to be posted until after consensus for the change is formed. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:57, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's September 27th. The track listing gonna be fixed? Dcreature14 (talk) 22:50, 27 September 2011 (UTC) dcreature14[reply]
Could you be more specific? It's not broken. It's right there in the artice. --IllaZilla (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The back of the CD and the names that show up when the CD is put in the computer say "Heart's All Gone Interlude" not "Heart's All Gone (Interlude)". I changed it on the main page but someone changed it back for some reason so can this be fixed? I also changed Chris Holmes's credits because he was on there twice and I put them in one heading. Not sure why it was like that. --LAW 23:11, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

record label?

Neighborhoods is the sixth studio album by the American pop punk band Blink-182, tentatively scheduled for release September 27, 2011 through Geffen Records. But on the album information box thing it says Interscope. I know these two labels are merged together now, but this need to be fixed. --60.229.178.130 (talk) 20:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed I changed the infobox to Geffen Records to reflect the lead sentence. This seems more plausible than Interscope, as the band's last 2 albums (Blink-182 and Greatest Hits) were both on Geffen, and as far as I know they have never released anything through Interscope. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
New album Interscope? the latest video Up All Night says so. Also Unterscope has a Blink-182 page. --121.218.80.253 (talk) 07:30, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Allmusic says Geffen. Let's wait until it comes out to confirm. --IllaZilla (talk) 07:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, your link says it's through Interscope, so it makes no sense to still label it as Geffen. I'll change it to Interscope. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.197.233.161 (talk) 02:28, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It said Geffen at the time I linked it. It appears to have been updated. --IllaZilla (talk) 03:56, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, understandable. The page was reverted after I fixed it though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.197.233.161 (talk) 04:23, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Worldwide release dates in different countries

Should more release dates be added? for example in Australia, the album release date is September 30, 2011 --124.179.37.74 (talk) 21:54, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In general only the earliest release date and/or release date in the home country is relevant. There is little point to listing the release dates for each country, as this isn't a shopping guide. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok you said earliest date right? The Australian version date has been changed [3] --121.212.16.220 (talk) 21:00, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate spelling

Should Neighbourhoods (Blink-182 album) be created to redirect to Neighborhoods (Blink-182 album)? --121.216.222.11 (talk) 21:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that might be a good idea.  Done --IllaZilla (talk) 21:50, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New single announced

The new single is to be "After Midnight". Should this be listed as a single on the album info box/band info box? --121.216.222.11 (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should wait until a release date for an actual single (as in CD, vinyl, or digital download) is announced. The date it will be played on the radio isn't a "release" date. Though we could certainly mention it in the body of the article. --IllaZilla (talk) 15:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Leak

Should the information about the album leak be added? --121.212.16.220 (talk) 10:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. See WP:LEAK: The leak has not resulted in significant responses or repercussions. --IllaZilla (talk) 14:44, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[4] [5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.45.12.115 (talk) 01:18, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's no really significant. All he really says is "yeah, it leaked". --IllaZilla (talk) 02:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

deluxe edition cover

why has it been deleted? --121.212.16.220 (talk) 09:16, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because it fails Wikipedia's non-free content criteria. The only difference between the deluxe cover and the regular one is inversion of the black/white, which is something we can easily explain using text alone; We don't need an additional copyrighted image for readers to understand the difference, as the difference is minimal. --IllaZilla (talk) 14:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What the?

Why has the tack listing been removed? it is official now. this can be proved/confirmed by looking at the Australian release. Which was released on September 23, 2011. --121.212.142.150 (talk) 03:16, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same thing, there is an abnormal amount of hypocrisy on this page. Don't place a track listing until its OFFICIALLY released, it gets released officially, track list removed. It's ridiculous.
Also, "Only first release date and home release are sufficient" has been stated, even though Australia had the first release date and it's still not presented on the article. Bah. ProjectPowerless (talk) 18:55, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to the article and its sources, the release date is the 27th (3 days from now). The article does not state an earlier release date in any countries, or cite any sources to that effect. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:27, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are plenty of sources that suggest the Australian release date. [6], [7], and itunes --121.212.142.150 (talk) 20:38, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know for a fact it was released in ireland yesterday as i bought it. Also here's proof. http://www.umusic.ie/artists/info.php?cat=b&ID=85 The tracklisting was 1. Ghost on the Dancefloor,2. Natives, 3. Up All Night,4. After midnight,5. Heart's All Gone,6. Wishing Well,7.Kaleidoscope,8. This is Home, 9. Mh. 4.18.2011, 10. Love Is Dangerous. Deluxe Edition has: 5. Snake Charmer, 6. Heart's all Gone (interlude), 13. Fighting The Gravity,14. Even If She Falls — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.194.187 (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am from Australia and already own the cd so I find it hard to understand why Its tracklisting wont be allowed to stay up. Especially considering I knew it for about a month before that. Another source that can be used is the tracklisting on Itunes in Australia and most likely the American one too (the Australian one had the tracklisting there for a few weeks before it was made downloadable). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.70.37 (talk) 01:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some dictatorship on this page if you ask me. Oh well, this will all be finally rectified tomorrow. 178.167.249.228 (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I added the tracklist only two days ago, listed from the UK album release. Pretty sure that is official. I ended up buying the album from Play.com (linked here if anyone needs it.) If it was missing the citation though, surely a citation needed tag would've been more fitting rather than actually removing the track listing. harbin91 (talk) 20:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yeah I bought mine on September 23. The track listing is official. it's just arrogant people won't let us put it on. just wait for the US release date, not long from now. --124.183.113.244 (talk) 21:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

incomplete track list

Where is the deluxe edition list? it's slightly different from the standard edition. it includes "Snake Charmer", "Heart's All Gone (Interlude)", Fighting the Gravity", and "Even If She Falls". --124.183.113.244 (talk) 04:14, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's directly under the standard one. Sergecross73 msg me 18:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
now it is. it wasn't when I wrote the comment above yours... --124.183.113.244 (talk) 22:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]