|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Blink-182 article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4|
|Blink-182 has been listed as a Music good article under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do, and if it no longer meets these criteria, it can be reassessed.
Review: December 19, 2013. ( ).
|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.|
|This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.|
|Sources for development of this article may be located at|
- 1 GA Review
- 2 small change of "the" to "they"
- 3 Side project
- 4 Management
- 5 Photo identifying Band Members on RHS is wrong and requires correcting.
- 6 Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2015
- 7 Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2015
- 8 Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2015
- 9 Band members/timeline
- 10 Semi-Protected Edit Request January 31, 2015
- 11 Cheshire Cat (debut studio album) release date
- 12 "as at 2015"?
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Blink-182/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork ✔Tea time
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- Pass or Fail:
Comments on GA criteria
Tom Delonge is still in the band. Text says he is not. He says otherwise: https://www.facebook.com/officialtomdelonge/photos/a.161059613916386.30214.161055970583417/867662499922757/?type=1&theater — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:16, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- Has a reference section. SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- Stable. SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:46, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- Prose is clear and readable. I'm not seeing any significant problems, and I'll do any copyediting as I continue the review. SilkTork ✔Tea time 11:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- NPOV - initially I felt that some of the claims about the band were excessive, but a variety of sources do support what is said. There are a couple of points which still need clarifying, but on the whole I'm not seeing an imbalance - indeed, there are negative comments in the Legacy section. SilkTork ✔Tea time 12:00, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Article is informative and detailed. Major points appear to be well covered. SilkTork ✔Tea time 12:24, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- Images are OK, though File:Soma San Diego flyer.jpg and File:WMAA Blink.jpg are copyright images used under fair use which requires that the use must be related to relevant discussion in the article. I'm not seeing that discussion in either case. Also, in both cases the captions are possibly a little too long, per WP:Caption. SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:37, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- What does the AllMusic page have that this article does not have? Readers are being directed there in the External links section; but if this is to be a GA standard article, it should have broad enough coverage to contain all the important elements that AllMusic has. (This comes under WP:LAYOUT, a GA criteria) SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:44, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- Focus. There appears to be too much fine detail for a general article. While the article should also be of interest to fans of the band, the main audience is the general public who are looking for an overview of the main points of the band; detail such as "Key's girlfriend, Anne Hoppus, introduced her brother Mark to DeLonge on August 2, 1992. The two clicked instantly and played for hours in DeLonge's garage" is unlikely to be of interest, and may irritate the general reader who are simply looking for the key facts. If a reader wishes to get into such fine detail, they can go to one of the book sources listed in the Bibliography. SilkTork ✔Tea time 11:11, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- The statement "Blink-182 was one of the most popular bands at the turn of the millennium, and spearheaded the second wave of pop punk and its journey into the mainstream" is sourced to a book I'm not able to consult at the moment. I've had a search on the internet, Google Books, and in the usual places, but I can't find another source to support this statement. It's a strong statement, and I'd like to be able to verify all aspects of it it. Is there another source which can confirm this statement? I found an About.com page - , though I haven't yet checked if About.com is considered a reliable source. SilkTork ✔Tea time 11:36, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- This discussion on WP:RSN is apparently where people are directed for views on About.com being a reliable source. It appears that consensus is that it is not because the authors are bloggers rather than respected journalists. SilkTork ✔Tea time 11:42, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Is the band timeline really necessary? Per MOS:TABLE and WP:EMBED we limit the use of tables to when the information is complicated and a graphic presentation would be helpful. I'm not seeing that is the case here. Indeed, it could make the band's history look more complex than it is. SilkTork ✔Tea time 13:23, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
I think there are aspects which still need working on as mentioned above - but that is more in line with tidying up rather than significant flaws. The information is accurate and is sourced, and the article is organised appropriately. Some trimming and tidying up would benefit the general reader, but that is more for ongoing development rather than work needed to be done to meet the GA criteria. Listing. SilkTork ✔Tea time 10:51, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
small change of "the" to "they"
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
in the section "formation and early years" the last paragraph there is the line Their first big show on the main floor took place on a Thursday, where the opened for Face to Face.' which should read Their first big show on the main floor took place on a Thursday, where they opened for Face to Face. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:15, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
It is known that DeLonge is mainly focusing on Angels & Airwaves, Hoppus has started a new band Nothing and Nobody, while Barker is contributing with other artists as a studio drummer, putting blink-182 on hold. It has been stated that blink-182 will be put on hold until all members are available, once again. Is it safe to say that seeming other members are focusing on other projects, while giving blink-182 some, if not little attention, that blink-182 have now become a side project? --126.96.36.199 (talk) 00:12, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Photo identifying Band Members on RHS is wrong and requires correcting.
Photo identifying Band Members on RHS is wrong ande requires correcting. I cant get in to edit and correct this. Can someone please correct.
Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2015
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Mlpearc (open channel) 11:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
The photo that features the band in 2003 in the "Mainstream breakthrough and continued success" section incorrectly identifies Hoppus as Delonge and vice versa. Delonge is on the left, Hoppus is in the center.
Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2015
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 18:35, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2015
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Tom DeLonge has yet to actually leave blink 182 so it should be made clear that he is still a member of the band as nothing has firmly been decided about his long-term future. Vaspala (talk) 09:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - The current article is based on this report amongst others - you need to find contradictory reports to support your assertion. Arjayay (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I recently have been part of a edit war on the Member Section/Timeline on the page. I feel it should be styled like on of the two below because it's what most pages do as well. I can list sources as needed. So below are the two I feel would be best if one is chosen.
This would be my first choice.
This would be my 2nd choice
I appreciate you stepping in, seeing as nobody else will. I don't agree with either of them, however there are aspects of both that I am happy with. The first one lists DeLonge first, which I agree with because I feel as though guitar should always go before bass. Also, I agree with the length being 1000. The second one is aligned at left, which I think is more common, yes? It also lists the vocals and other instruments together, something that I have always done and agreed with (however I would have it as "vocals" as opposed to "lead vocals", seeing as they are both the same and there is no backing vocals). There are also aspects of both that I disagree with. Firstly, both list non-studio albums, etc., which I feel is completely unnecessary, and the bar increment should be 30, because there are only four people on the timeline. Secondly, the way that the sections list the members, I feel as though the vocals should be stated before the instrument (e.g. vocals, bass), the touring members should be listed together, and the years should be small (I don't understand why people would think that to not do so is common – very rarely have I seen years that are not small, like with the above examples). Lastly, I don't like the colour schemes (not that it's the issue). This is how I would have the section:
Timeline (although this would be a sub-section)
Also, for this discussion, I feel as though everyone should start a sub-section when they have their say, so that it is easy to differentiate between everyone's examples/opinions. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 00:52, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I like different aspects of the first two.
As for the first one:
- I like that the vocals are split in color from their respective instruments. Reason being, if Blink decides to pick up a new guitarist, it won't necessarily mean he will also be a vocalist.
- I like the colors the best. Maybe switch Orange to Yellow. You can't go wrong with primary colors.
- I like the order that the members are listed. Obviously both are Vocalists, and traditionally, guitarists are listed before bassist on Wiki.
As for the Second one:
- I like that both Studio Albums and Non-Studio Albums are included. There's no need to be more detailed by splitting EP's and Live Albums.
- I like the horizontal length. The first one seems too long, horizontally, but this isn't really an issue for me to be honest.
As for the third one, the only thing I like about it is there is only one header for the Touring Members. I agree that there is no need for "Former Touring Members" as the years next to their name already represents this, and they aren't official members so they technically can't be "former". They were just simply filling in. Now, what I don't like is that it doesn't show any Non-Studio Albums and the color scheme is just too similar between the Blue and Purple.
My pick is the first one with some minor tweaks.
Semi-Protected Edit Request January 31, 2015
There are numerous references to Tom Delonge leaving the band, which is untrue. Band-mates Mark Hoppus and Travis Barker SAID Delonge left the band. This was followed by Delonge denying he left the band and Hoppus and Barker acknowledging he, technically, is still a member of the band. Here's an excerpt from the referenced article: Interviewer:"If this is a permanent break for Tom, do you see a future for the name Blink-182 without him?" Hoppus: "There are legalities involved with this. As Tom pointed out, he technically didn't quit the band." So any edit involving Matt Skiba, who is only filling in at one single show at a festival, which is by no means permanent or binding, and Tom's departure are overzealous and factually incorrect. Also, I have no idea if I'm doing this correctly. Zammitj1 (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Cheshire Cat (debut studio album) release date
When was this album actually released? It's a fact that it was released on February 17, but what year? On the album page itself it states it was released on 1995; however physical copies of the album states it was released in 1994 link. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 06:14, 14 February 2015 (UTC)