Talk:Blondie (band)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Blondie (band) was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
September 18, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
November 5, 2006 Peer review Reviewed
August 2, 2009 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Blondie (band):
  • Add citations/references
    • Preferably us <ref>, </ref> and <references/>
  • Maybe add an extract from their songs?
  • Remove number signs for chart positions per MOS:NUMBERSIGN
  • Format consistency Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Full date formatting
    • Dates in article body text should all have the same format.
    • Dates in article references should all have the same format.
  • Better reference for the 1982 Grammy video of the year award -- it just goes to an unsourced wikipedia page that has no Blondie content.


I never thought of Blondie as even vaguely related to disco. Is this really the case? --Robert Merkel 03:49 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yes that is sort of very true as rapture was a dance song (not exactly what they called disco), and the image and marketing were always aggressive as a business thing crossover music though their roots were firmly in the Lower East Side and Punk, there is some confused connection where Steven Sprouse who worked with Blondie and myself as he was/is an artist photographer, designer who I believe produced two videos for her (am I senile?).

Andrew Zito.

Michael Stipe, among others, has described the bitter disapointment that he felt when Heart of Glass was released, it was seen as disco and more importantly as a sell out. Now he feels differently. Hyacinth 21:10, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Nothing constructive or useful to add, just that I think Blondie are the best band ever! pomegranate 00:02, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)

It's funny how disco remains such a dirty word. When the Ramones worked with Phil Spector and had string instruments on Baby I Love You, no one complained. When Patti Smith released the manstream structured, Springsteen co-written Because The Night, no one complained again. Anyway, people get confused because "new wave" and Blondie's music specifically has a danceable beat that was distinct from the mainstream rock music of the 70s. I even saw a music writer try to claim that "Dreaming" was disco, which is absurd. "Heart of Glass" is a disco crossover (it was initially called the Disco Song in 1974/75), but with electronic eurodisco, and not the mainstream variety. More importantly, its combining rock/new wave elements with disco elements. What results is a hybrid, combining mainstream and non-mainstream elements. So you don't have straightforward disco as opposed to something new. Finally, terms like "selling out" are worthless, reflecting the hidebound fear of change, as well as an ignorance of the first wave punk bands. And later bands like New Order were esteemed for doing what Blondie did earlier. HOG had a significant impact on mainstream music precisely because it involved non-mainstream elements, helping to create dance rock.Alexhaniha (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:16, 29 August 2011 (UTC).

Blondie's Influence[edit]

How is Blondie one of the most influential bands of the 20th century? Big, yes; influential, no. How many modern bands cite Blondie as an influence? I can't think of any off the top of my head. Unless someone who knows more about Blondie cites some sources and some artists who cite Blondie as an influence, I'm going to modify and/or remove that statement. --Elysianfields 00:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

When you do that, go in the history and check out what happened on August 1. A perfectly good version was deleted and replaced with a rather POV fan-rave. I've been meaning to merge the old, good article back in, but if you get to it first, awesome. GTBacchus 01:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out which version was the non biased. I merged them as best as I could. The new version has a lot of superflous information, but I figured we might as well keep it; and I'm not comfortable deleting tons of stuff without anyone else's consent. Especially since I know virtually nothing about Blondie. Anyway, hope the merge is satisfactory. I also restored the old image because:
  • The new one is by no means flattering
  • It's a good representation of Blondie in their heyday.
well that's it. thanks again bacchus. my work here is done (: --Elysianfields 06:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't know. Arcade Fire? Lady Gaga? Muse? Radiohead? Black Eyed Peas? How about The Go-Gos or Duran Duran from way back when? Kim Wilde? Or Berlin, who did a good cover of Shayla? That's just off the top of my head. But I agree that bolsterism should not be in encyclopedia articles and claims of "influence" are notoriously subjective. Still music really shifted in their direction in the last six years, so I found the comment entertaining. I see a lot more Blondie in current music than the Ramones or the Clash. More generally, they are one of the first new wave bands (first album 1976) and one of the progenitors of dance rock, which you saw all throughout the 80s. But music fans debate about "influence" endlessly, and fans of a band will always see their favorites supposedly influencing everyone else. I even find claims by music writers about a band's influence suspect, so I'd rather see it left out.Alexhaniha (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC).


Right, first things first.

  1. Blondie was, and still is Disco, thank you very much. Heart Of Glass ring any bells? If that isn't disco, then I dont know what is, also their last single Good Boys was modern disco, and was hailed by some reviewers as the Heart Of Glass of 2003.
  2. Second thing. Blondie was not mainly punk. Thier first 2 albums were punky, but the third and forth, were New Wave and power pop, which, incidentley, were there most famous. The Fith and sixth were an eclectic mix of dance, calypso, reggae, 1920's style, and classical.
  3. Blondie has influenced many people, for example, Gwen Stefani, Madonna, Garbage and Kelly Osbourne among others all say that they were influenced.

So dont go telling me what Blondie was, and so forth, because I will disprove you otherwise! And finally, if, as you say, you dont know much about Blondie, dont interfere with things you know nothing about, as I will continually change them back to how they were and how they should be. I am a massive Blondie fan and collecter of their records, I think I know better! Scaryspice 10:45, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

That also makes you extremely biased
What you are saying is correct however the style in which you place it into the article is out of step with the other articles here. The phrase "Blondie is Punk. Blondie is Rock. Blondie is Pop. Blondie is New Wave. Blondie is Reggae. Blondie is Disco. Blondie is Hip-Hop." - that's just not encycopedic style. Of course "Heart of Glass" is disco. Of course "Island of Lost Souls" is reggae (and calypso for that matter). Whether it's accurate or not is beside the point. Also it is not necessary to make linked words bold. Once again that is not the correct style. I'm reverting because I disagree with the style in which this things are presented, which is not to say that I think it's inaccurate. Please have a look at other music based articles to see how they're set out. It's not a question of you being more knowledgeable about Blondie than other editors. Unconventional as Blondie may have been, an encyclopedic article needs to conform to a certain style. I'm going to revert it back. Please don't revert it. Thanks. Rossrs 12:07, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Can people here calm down about "labelling" a style for Blondie. Disco? Punk? They created a lots of both (and much more) and this can be heard on the 1st four albums and that captures the zetigeist of the City in the late seventies.

Is it possible to refer to the blow-up at the Rock and Roll Hall of fame in this article? Or would that qualify as gossip and hearsay?SweetHeart666 17:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be a fair amount of sarcasm in this article. Any amount would be inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. I would clean it up, but I don't know anything about Blondie. Blondie fans, you're on notice. Swatson1978 02:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Article slot[edit]

I think this should probably be at Blondie, with the dab page moved to Blondie (disambiguation) as it seems to me this is the article most readers would expect to find. Agree? Disagree? --kingboyk 11:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Disagree, particularly because of Blondie (comic strip). I definitely want the disambig page there not just for navigation, but to catch all of the misdirected links. The un-disambiguated links coming into Blondie right now, for example, are intended for a number of different articles (and I'll fix them shortly). ×Meegs 11:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Also disagree, per Meegs Rossrs 13:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Bad bad article[edit]

This article is just a mess, pure and simple. it is all over the place, does Blondie no justice, and what are all the list of points at the end of the article? Did someone just get bored and condense the rest into a few crappy power points? Someone needs to clean it up, or get rid of it. Paul75 22:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

How is it now? IolakanaT 11:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


As per User:Paul75's comments which agree with, I've made some major changes. I know it still needs a lot of work but I hope that it's a start. Maybe I've taken it from a "bad, bad article" to merely a "bad article" ;-) I have :

  1. Broken the career into sections, each of which desperately needs to be expanded upon, but I've tried to provide a chronological summary of their career which I see as being in 4 stages. (1. early success as a new wave act, 2. huge success as a pop act, 3. a lengthy hiatus and 4. a regeneration/return).
  2. I've rewritten a lot of text but the only section I decimated was the lengthy postscript to their Hall of Fame induction. It was gossippy, uncited and unnecessary and gave excessive weight to one incident in a 30 year career. The tensions within the band should be discussed but this was really putting all eggs into one basket and it made the whole artice very lopsided.
  3. created a "Legacy" section. I think this is where critical commentary can be put, along with who they've influenced and their overall impact on music in general.
  4. removed "Previous band members" section. It was hugely repetitive and the same info is now included in the "Band members" section, simply by adding dates after their names. I've removed the Bellamo sisters completely. I understand they provided backing vocals (so did numerous other people at different times) but I can't find anything to say they were ever band members - so out they go. Rossrs 01:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I think you have done a brilliant job, well done. This article is great now, a huge improvement on the previous one. Keep up the great work!Paul75 23:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. I appreciate the comment. I'd like to see it eventually grow into a featured article - I think the band is interesting and influential enough to warrant it. Rossrs 15:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I love the direction this article has taken, and appreciate all the work involved. I, too, didn't like the sarcasm I'd found here some time back. I've made some minor edits and hope they're helpful as the article moves along. Even Blondie's detractors have to admit they were a major band straddling genres at a vital and fascinating and acrimonious crossroads in music, and deserve a balanced, objective bio. It's ironic people didn't get the point of what they did, and blamed them for not remaining any one thing, or for becoming any other thing. Abrazame 12:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


Just a couple of suggestions. The article should really talk more about the 1978-1981 period when Blondie was really huge in the U.S. & UK. It seems to go in depth into the rise and fall of the band then glosses over their peak period. In particular, the touring - how much did they tour during this period - how big were the shows (attendance) and what cities, etc? Also, Blondie's influence on dance music. The double 12" of Rapture/The Tide Is High spent 4 weeks at #1 on Billboard's dance chart in 1981. After their breakup, several remixed versions of their hits became dance hits in the U.S. including Rapture, Heart Of Glass, and Atomic which went top 10 on the U.S. dance chart in 1994-1995. (Source: Joel Whitburn's "Hot Dance/Disco 1974-2003") matt_tx00 03:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your comment and I couldn't agree more. I've been working on this over the last couple of weeks but I haven't been able to find a lot of reliable info. Even their official website glosses over the middle bit and focuses on the beginning and end of their career. If you can add anything please do. Rossrs 10:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
What do you feel of #Mainstream success? It has numerous extracts from its songs and is fully cited. IolakanaT 20:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I think it's ok. It could possibly do with a little more depth, but it's quite thorough. Rossrs 07:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

GA Passed[edit]

For it's use of inline citations, good prose and sound samples, I believe that Blondie is an excellent Good Article. Morgan695 01:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Die Hard Fan[edit]

I have to say, I'm a Blondie fan to the extreme and give this article an A+! Blondie16 03:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Changing Band Line Up[edit]

I saw a documentary on the BBC recently ("Blondie - One Way Or Another" Friday 21st July at 22.35pm.) which discussed in some detail the acrimonious feelings about previous band members. It also showed the unbelievable scene at the band's induction into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame with Frank Infante begging Debbie Harry for him and Nigel Harrison to be allowed to play with them. The change of line up over the years is not well represented. I think that the band line up should be added against each album and single. The documentary also showed their ex manager talking about "kicking out Gary Valentine". I think the article would also be inmproved if it had more information about why the line up changed and why there is so much bad feeling about it all. --ChrisGrahamUK 11:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: blondies 80's/1990's Remixes[edit]

Under the discography section I really do think that the single remixes released in the 1980s/1990's should be given their own individual pages.

Each single was released under a separate cat no, have different production values and information, all charted on the UK charts, and all are officially recognised by the Guiness Book of Hit Singles and Albums as being a seperate hit single entries.

Furthermore the singles themselves have special B-sides available only on the specified releases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dommers50000 (talkcontribs) 20:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no reason for a new article for a remix. Song articles are about songs, therefore a remix is part of the history of the song. Additional cover images, chart placings, chronologies and record label catalog numbers can be placed into the single infobox in the original article. The same scenario is true for song cover versions. - eo 20:36, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


In the Regeneration chapter someone wrote: ""Maria" — which Destri had written while in high school[18]". Well, that's not true. If you check the link to the note, you'll find out this (by Debbie Harry): "He (Destri) wrote it about when he was in high school, in Catholic school, and there were no girls. He was always dreaming of the ideal girl.". To me, that means that he wrote it remembering the high school days, NOT that he wrote it in his high school days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertotr (talkcontribs) 06:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:S443109.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:S443109.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

A couple of things[edit]

Hiya! I as chilling at home, listening to their first album and decided to read their page. This may be a bit anal, but there are a couple of times where the article contradicts itself. In one of the early paragraphs, it lists five original members, with two joining later, but at the end of the article, it discusses seven original members. Also, it says that the 'Blondie' album made it into the Australian top 5 (again in an early section) but, in the chart section, it's not. I would correct it but I wouldn't be able to verify which information is correct. Also, do people really "often" confuse 'I Touch Myself' as a Blondie song? I've never heard that, and maybe I don't because I'm Australian and the song was a big deal over here. Amphlett sounds nothing Harry! That's my two cents. Do I get any change?Twinstar (talk) 09:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

umm spaming in the first sentence? someone tell me —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Music samples[edit]

I have restored the original set of music samples to this article. Each of the original samples is 10% of the length of the full work or 30 seconds whichever is less which is the aim as outlined at Wikipedia:Music samples. Each of the original set is also of a lower quality than the newer samples, also as per the same guideline. With copyrighted music samples, we should always be using the minimum required to convey the information needed, not to use the maximum that we can get away with. For example a 15 second sample of "In the Flesh" is enough to convey the general sound of this piece of work. A 30 second sample is about 25% of the total song, when 10% is what is to be aimed for. Rossrs (talk) 14:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Club 51?[edit]

What is Club 51? Is it really a club in New York in the 80s? Shouldn't that be Studio 54? The footnote that refers to that sentence has a link, but when you go to the link it has nothing about Club 51 or CBGB, just a standard bio from Microsoft music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brooklyn-alvin (talkcontribs) 22:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

There was a Club 57 in Manhattan's East Village, which was mostly a jazz venue but did host many New Wave-type acts. Timothy Horrigan (talk) 22:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

I think people are thinking of Club 82 in the East Village.Alexhaniha (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC).


Seriously? I'm only a casual fan of Blondie, but i've never heard anything even vaguely reminiscent of pop-punk. Jh39 (talk) 02:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, they don't sound like Blink 182, but many of their songs are punk-ish pop, or pop-ish punk. So maybe the label pop-punk, in a broad sense, fits after all.--Martin de la Iglesia (talk) 17:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, they do have pop influences and punk (specifically post-punk) influences, but isn't that basically just a definition of New Wave, post-punk with influence from other pop genres? It's true that in a broad sense, they play music mixing pop and punk, but I don't see how they fit into the specific genre of pop-punk. I'd say New Wave covers their style adequately Jh39 (talk) 19:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's fair or completely accurate to file Blondie into one genre of music because they've repeatedly incorporated a lot of musical styles through the years, some more than others, pop-punk being one of them. Just because they don't sound like the new age pop-punk doesn't mean they weren't for their time and that label is rightly their's. And "new wave" doesn't describe their entire last couple of albums in any sense or style. - LoveLaced (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

but isn't that basically just a definition of New Wave, post-punk with influence from other pop genres?

I'd just like to add here that New Wave, once it developed into a distinct, sound-oriented label, was meant more to infer punk music with influences from pop-genres--or if you prefer, pop/rock music with influences from punk. "Post-punk" was coined, from my understanding, for New Wave or Punk-styled music with a more "avant-garde" approach (prog and krautrock being major influences), containing usually more serious moods and subject matter. It came after New Wave did, having taken off at the tail end of the inaugural Punk/New Wave explosion. And, although there is American music considered to be post-punk, post-punk as a music movement was largely a UK thing.

So that being said, it's safe to conclude that Blondie, having started out in '74, actually predate post-punk and thus couldn't have really derived influence from there. Instead, they were influenced by 60-70s garage rock/surf and proto-punk, 70s glam, 70s power pop and 60s girl group pop (i.e, the quintessential 70s New Wave act personified). As far as Pop-punk goes, I personally would also have no problem with using it, particularly given that pop-punk and New Wave labeling overlap wasn't unheard of at the time (much like with post-punk and new wave, power pop and pop-punk). Theburning25 (talk) 07:19, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


An image of the group needs to be at the top of the page instead of the middle and bottom.--jeanne (talk) 08:01, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The Hunter era[edit]

I tried to simplify the story about the two "For Your Eyes Only" songs. I couldn't find any first- or second-hand sources for it--- although it is plausible and it is also told in other Wikipedia articles. It seems a little unlikely that the band would have accepted an offer to perform the For Your Eyes Only move theme without knowing whether or not they also had a deal to write the song. But it does not seem unlikely that Chris Stein might have written the song "on spec" with the movie in mind. The old version of the story seemed a little overdramatic and relied too much on things are unknowable. (For example, almost 30 years later, there is no way to know if the producers actively disliked Blondie's song or whether they merely liked it less than Bill Conti and Mike Leeson's song which Sheena Easton eventually performed.) This section of the article still (as of June 22, 2009) ascribes the breakup of the band to drama caused by the commercial and critical failure of the album. There is no cite for this. Oddly, the album was not in fact a huge commercial or critical failure, although it was a little less successful than the previous efforts. It charted #33 in the USA, which is by no means a failure. Timothy Horrigan (talk) 23:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Please see my comments below if you are still following this topic. Xblkx (talk) 09:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Blondie (band)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

Symbol unsupport vote.svg In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of August 2, 2009, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):
    • I made some copy-edits
    b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    • Ref #5 [1]is dead; ref #7 [2] does not support the statement; I fixed some deadlinks and formatted others. Recent edits have added more unsupported statements so I will delist as there seems to be no progress on this article. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its scope.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    • Just a couple of referencing points to be addressed. Notifying major contributors and projects. On Hold. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Recent additions are not improving the article so I will delist. It can be brought back to WP:GAN when fully referenced. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

It's improvement time[edit]

I've been going through this article and adding the requested citations so we can get this back to GA status.

I'm seeking comments/feedback especially about the following specific current content (with my input in italics):

Blondie became regulars at New York's Club 51 <<-- I agree with the questions brought up earlier in the discussion page. I do not believe there was ever such an entity as Club 51. I suspect the reference was to Studio 54. I propose to modify this as such, or delete it if it can't be sourced.

The song is the band's biggest selling single in the U.S. <<-- looking for a source

Blondie was offered the chance to perform Conti and Leeson's song, but they turned the offer down. Sheena Easton's rendition of Conti and Leeson's theme song became a top-ten single worldwide. <<-- looking for a source and a reason why Sheena Easton's version being a top-ten single is relevant to a Blondie article in an encyclopedia. Is this even relevant? I have print articles that can source some of the facts in this discussion, but it would be some effort to dig them out. Should I? Comments please.

In the same section, seeking some verifiable Clem Burke and Jimmy Destri references for the statements therein.

Valentine did not play on the album, although he did co-write two tracks. <<--My understanding is that Gary co-wrote two tracks on the preliminary demo version of No Exit, neither of which were on the commercial release. I looked in the album credits. If he did co-write anything on it, he's uncredited. I doubt that happened. I'm not opposed to having this statement in the article if it can be sourced, but I've looked, and I can't source this statement. My knowledge would be considered original research [WP:OR]. I might be able to verifiably source the fact that Gary *played* on the first three reunion shows in 1997, but that's probably all I can do here.

I believe that I can source the remaining 'needed citations' in the article from what printed materials I have on hand: Making Tracks, Cathay Che's Platinum Blonde, From Punk To The Present, and lots of rock magazines from the relevant time periods, all of which are reliable secondary sources.

Looking for discussion about the above and what I should spend time seeking out and what the consensus is here. Xblkx (talk) 09:18, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the mention of a Club 51, this is not supported by the source so I removed it. As for "Call Me" being their best selling single in the US, that could be true but I doubt it can be substantiated. And the Sheena Easton info is unnecessary. Piriczki (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm 99% certain "Club 51" was an error and I'm not even sure how anything about the band or Debbie frequenting Studio 54 was even relevant, so thanks for removing it.

"Call Me" is their best selling US single, and I can probably source this, though not immediately. I'll have to look around because I think that information is noteworthy. Thanks for your comments. Xblkx (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I think the original author meant to say Club 82 but since it is not as well known as the other two venues mentioned, I would still leave it out. "Call Me" was probably their best selling single but keep in mind that Billboard chart history doesn't necessarily verify that. Something like "most successful" or "most popular" could possibly be supported by chart data though.
Some of the fact tags in the article seem to have been added gratuitously. There's a fact tag after the sentence about "Rush, Rush" and "Feel the Spin" but it's not clear what needs to be verified. It should just be removed.
Lastly, the article says that they announced their break up in August 1982 but I don't recall any announcement. It seemed more like they just weren't heard from after the 1982 tour and after awhile it became obvious they had disbanded. Piriczki (talk) 13:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

More commentary

All of this makes sense to me. I never even thought about that reference possibly being to Club 82, but you're probably right. They may have played there as Blondie but it would have been very early, significantly before mainstream success. Feel free to change the wording on the Call Me reference the way you suggested. I am aware that the song was nominated in January 1981 (by NARAS?) for the 23rd annual Grammy awards. That's relevant here but I don't have a citation offhand. If I find some sales data rather than chart data (which I believe I have in print) which is not WP:OR then I will edit it later. As for "Rush, Rush" and "Feel the Spin", these were released as Debbie Harry solo works and I tend to think they don't belong here at all. They might be more appropriately included in Debbie Harry. It should suffice to document that they remained active (and in fact, to document all of the band members who remained active, if possible).

Yes, some of the fact tags do seem gratuitously added. It seemed odd that there were some sprinkled in the running text at odd locations by the reviewer, but not on specific facts that if *I* were reviewing would tag (such as the source for all of the chart data for the singles, or the source for having to sell the mansion due to finances!). Possibly the reviewer was trying to indicate a desire to have the entire article reviewed, rather than seeking a citation specifically for what was tagged. I want to take two passes through, first to add the references for those tags or remove the questionable material, and then to go back through it sentence by sentence and figure out what's really important (i.e., is it useful to a reader to know that the Boomtown Rats opened for Blondie at the Roundhouse in 1978?).

Regarding that last part about the breakup, a more accurate statement, and what that I can source with at least two print references, is that "they announced the cancellation of the remaining dates in the tour and would not perform again together until May 1997." Something was formally announced in one of the Official Fan Club publications, but I think you're right, it wasn't announcing a "breakup". I will dig it up. Xblkx (talk) 19:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

This interview in Spin magazine from 1986 sheds some light on the early 1980s time period. It might be helpful. Piriczki (talk) 14:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Possible references[edit]

As I am finding some interesting facts and references that I don't want to lose, and which might be useful for the current article or a future enhancement to it, I will put these in here. Xblkx (talk) 19:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

People magazine named Debbie Harry among the "25 Most Intriguing People of 1979" (I read this in the Blondie Fan Club newsletter, should find original issue, maybe belongs in Debbie Harry). Xblkx (talk) 19:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Saturday Night Live, Oct. 13, 1979 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xblkx (talkcontribs) 21:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

More topics to discuss[edit]

There is another part of this article that I'm interested in mentioning specifically as a suggestion for a significant edit:

Stein and Harry (at the time a couple) stayed together, and retreated from the public spotlight for a few years, with the exception of the minor single releases "Rush Rush" (1983, from the film Scarface) and 1985's dance track "Feel The Spin".[citation needed]. Harry was forced to sell the couple's five-story mansion to pay off debts that the band had run up, Stein owed in excess of $1 million, and drug use was becoming an increasing concern for Debbie and Chris. Debbie decided to call off her intimate relationship to Stein, and moved downtown. She later stated in a 2006 interview that she felt she was having a sort of breakdown due to all the stress.

Two important observations (comments/discussion requested):

(1) There are no references to this. If I get an opportunity, I'll invite the author who added this to give one. The only thing I can source here is "Debbie decide to call off her intimate relationship" (not *to* Stein, but *with* Stein). That is documented as occurred on the day of Andy Warhol's death. But what is the verifiable source of the statements about a 5-story mansion, $1 million debt "the band had run up", drug use, moved downtown, and the 2006 interview? Not opposed to the inclusion, but I don't want this article to reference unsourced material that will be challenged later when the next album comes out, after the article is renominated for an upgraded status.

(2) The style here of mixing "Stein", "Harry", "Debbie", and "Chris" indiscriminately does not seem to be grammatically or stylistically appropriate. I could (and will) suggest something stated factually that Debbie left Chris (and when) citing an interview, but emphasizing an even more important fact with respect to the band, which is that they continued to work together professionally (and still do to this day). Xblkx (talk) 08:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


I made a lot of edits today, mostly minor edits (grammar, WP:MOS, making citations and dates internally consistent) but one to bring up is that I changed most of the "Deborah Harry" references to "Debbie Harry" because this is a Blondie band article, and in the context of the time period of this article, Debbie was known as Debbie. Open for discussion. One 'Deborah' remains but I think it is a quotation.

I put some stuff on the TTD (Things to do) list. Xblkx (talk) 07:57, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Some other tasks not on the TTD list[edit]

These things bother me... need sources, have style issues, etc.:

1. Inconsistency with position of the Media (playable song sample) items. In some sections, it's in the middle, in some, it's at the beginning.

2. "Blondie became regulars at Max's Kansas City and CBGB.[13]" -- I think this is important, but as the lead sentence to a paragraph, it is in complete collision with the content that follows. I'm thinking about something that describes the fact they played regularly at those venues, and were discovered there: "After performing for x years at Max's and CBGB, so-and-so did this-or-that which led to" (... their deal with Private Stock) and have this lead into the content of that paragraph. I believe this is discussed in Making Tracks (which, oddly, isn't a reference to this article!).

3. "Selling more than one million copies and garnering major airplay, the single reached number one in many countries including the U.S., where, for the most part, Blondie had previously been considered an "underground" band." -- a few statements here I would like to see sourced.

4. (over a million copies sold - gold status). -- Isn't a million copies platinum?

5. In lead paragraph "with varied results" -- Is this relevant and sourced? Every band's projects have "varied results."

6. Destri solo career -- the article contained this text: "Keyboardist Jimmy Destri also embarked on a solo career of his own with somewhat less success than Harry.[4]" This reference does not substantiate "with somewhat less success". I removed this text in favor of discussion here. I'd like better representation of all the original band members in the lead paragraph, hopefully something positive and interesting, like Jimmy's music production credits, Clem's collaborations and performances, Chris's music production and performances. This is well-documented later in the article and is probably only a matter of rewording for inclusion in the lead paragraph and correctly referencing.

7. In a 1998 interview, band member Clem Burke recalled seeing the episode in which the wrong song was played, but he and Chris Stein suggested that it may have been a deliberate subterfuge on the part of Meldrum. -- It would be good to source this!

8. "double-A release of "X-Offender" " -- It is not obvious to the casual reader what this means.

9. Regeneration section needs to be more concise; some text about reuniting and performing is duplicated and is not temporally consistent.

10. In Legacy and Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction (2006), the paragraph that starts out "By 1982," seems inconsistent with that section. 24 years elapse between paragraphs in that section and the two paragraphs have nothing to do with each other.

11. At the end of the 1979 section, I would recommend a statement something like the following (with some research to be done to fill in the missing information. Is this WP:NPOV?):

Blondie's mainstream success combined with Debbie Harry's intense visual appeal (she appeared on at least xxx magazine covers in 1979 and was said to be the most photographed woman of all time) also resulted in significant television exposure: Blondie was the musical guest for the season opener of Saturday Night Live's fifth season on 13 October 1979; they also peformed on American Bandstand, Top of the Pops, Dick Clark's New Year's Rockin' Eve 1979-80, two episodes of The Midnight Special, and were profiled on the news magazine program 20/20.[citation needed] The band continued to tour throughout 1979, performing [some number of shows in some number of cities].

I have reliable sources for everything in that paragraph, but I have to find them. Any comments? Anyone? Xblkx (talk) 10:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The statement "most photographed woman of all time" will be difficult to verify and is probably not true in the first place. I think the quote at the time was "most photographed woman in rock and roll." Also, at that time, a gold single was for sales of 1,000,000 copies and platinum was 2,000,000. A couple other things: the media files are breaking up the article and should be placed to the right with the text wrapped and the chart positions in parenthesis after the album titles are unnecessary and disrupt the flow of the text. Piriczki (talk) 21:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
In the order you mentioned them, that 'statement' is something that I read a very long time ago, and it may have been true at the time but again, not all that important for an article about Blondie (band). Even if I had a source to it (at the time), I will agree with you.... I'm just thinking out loud here. I never realized that a gold single ever represented a million copies. I am aware that gold and platinum awards are different in different countries. As for the media files breaking up the articles, I completely agree with this. I wish I had more experience with editing/formatting articles because I would change it. I like the idea of the chart positions being presented as information so what would you think about a table of information instead of an inline chart positions? That would make it easy to add to, and it would address a wikipedia guideline to not use '#' for 'No.' or "Number" (MOS:NUMBERSIGN) which would make it even more textually disruptive. Xblkx (talk) 00:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
I tried moving the image and audio files but it still didn't look right. I think the infobox is too long. Does it really need all those line breaks in it? I'm also thinking the members section is too long for the infobox with Fred Smith, Billy O'Connor and Eddie Martinez listed. Perhaps it could start with the lineup from the first album and mention the others in the body of the text. An example of that approach can be found in The Beatles article where the infobox only lists the lineup that was most well known and discusses the early lineup changes with Stu Sutcliffe and Pete Best in the article. Piriczki (talk) 15:31, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
I'll take a look at that next week. Demands on my time are getting the best of me with jury duty on top of it all. I don't think that Smith, O'Connor, Krall, or Martinez need to be listed in the infobox at all. My opinion would be to include Valentine, Infante, and Harrison in the infobox and move the others into the running text unless there are objections. Xblkx (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Broken official site links[edit]

Note: links to specific pages to the "Official Blondie Web Site" have moved from or to and they may move again. I will try to update them shortly so they are not entirely broken in this article. Xblkx (talk) 04:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Disco as a genre[edit]

Wasn't this style only used on 1 or 2 songs at best, or am I recalling wrong? Because I'm under the impression that performing simply 1-2 songs in a style isn't normally enough to apply it as a genre. Theburning25 (talk) 07:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Some of their biggest international hits were disco records: "Heart of Glass", "Call Me", "Atomic", "Rapture". Cloonmore (talk) 12:41, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, well "Call Me" has never struck me as a disco song, more just straight Rock. Even "Rapture" seems to be more Funk with Hip-Hop influence than disco. I guess it's not a big deal though. Theburning25 (talk) 13:28, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Call Me was more rock/power pop. There are a few metal covers of that song. Atomic was definitely not a straight disco song. More like rock-techno. Rapture was funk with hip-hop elements. Heart of Glass is a rock-(euro)disco hybrid. Again, Blondie's music has a lot of cross-genre elements. It defies oversimplification. Saying there is a disco element to some Blondie songs is not completely inaccurate, but it is a lazy classification made worse by confusion about new wave in general and the failure to recognize the danceable element of new wave music as distinct from disco. The book "Are We Not New Wave" is pretty good on this point Alexhaniha (talk)

That definitely sounds about on the dot, Alexhaniha. Well said. I'll be looking up that book, too. Theburning25 (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Parallel Lines certification status?[edit]

I looked at the source cited but I've read numerous accounts that PLs was a multi-platinum album. Does this need to be corrected? User:Alexhaniha|Alexhaniha]] (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:57, 29 August 2011 (UTC).

I looked it up for the UK. Parallel Lines was on the UK charts for 108 weeks, and for substantial period in the top ten. Maybe the UK charting services never made the distinction, but there is no way it was a single platinum album.Alexhaniha (talk)

I think I finally got it. Albums are not automatically certified. Rather the label has to pay the RIAA and similar entities to certify albums. Thus an album could sell 2 million copies but if the label never pays the fee, it won't receive certification as a multi-platinum album. There is also substantial discrepancies between certified sales amounts and claimed sales amounts that are industry wide.Alexhaniha (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC).

Excessive detail[edit]

Moved from the article: In the Netherlands, it was the first single of the album in September 1978, where it made the Top 10.[1] Such detail belongs in the album/song articles. gidonb (talk) 15:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


  1. ^ "Dutch Charts > Blondie". Stichting Nederlandse Top 40. Retrieved 2012-09-22. 

Who's Andy?[edit]

Who is the Andy referred to in this sentence? "It was directed by Laurent Rejto and features cameos by Kate Pierson from the B-52's, James Lorinz (Frankenhooker), Johnny Dynell, Chi-Chi Valenti, the Dazzle Dancers, Rob Roth, Barbara Sicuranza, Larry Fessenden, Alan Midgette (Andy’s double), The Five Points Band, Guy Furrow, Kitty Boots and Hattie Hathaway."

Makes me think it was copied verbatim from the cited source. Thoughts?THX1136 (talk) 15:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Blondie (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:44, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Peter Leeds?[edit]

Why no mention? He's where the money went! Andy Dingley (talk) 00:57, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Blondie (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:24, 22 July 2017 (UTC)