Talk:Dookie/Archive 1

Archive 1

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of July 17, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Clean up short sentences like The album charted well.

2. Factually accurate?: While all the singles of the album charted in a couple of countries, the hit single Basket Case charted in many countries, and often peaking quite high. - Needs a ref

3. Broad in coverage?: Y

4. Neutral point of view?: Y

5. Article stability? Y

6. Images?: WP:FURG - [1]

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — Giggy _U^CP 00:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

1. Well written?: Fixed some I saw.

2. Factually accurate?: Added refs.

6. Images?: Added fair use stuff.

Also, you may want to press refresh on your browser, as one of the examples you used was from an older edit, which had been fixed since. Xihix 00:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

 Done - Passed. Congratulations! Giggy _U^CP 04:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

YES! Thanks a lot man!!! Yessss!!! Xihix 06:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Passed FA, it seems

It's been listed under the FA list, so I'm assuming it was promoted. Awesome! Xihix 18:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Even more Awesome, it's the 1500th FA! Buc 19:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, the 1500th? Amazing! Xihix 19:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

cannabis/LSD claims and lyric quotes need verification

I noticed this edit in RC and it seems that neither the cannabis nor the LSD are sourced. (the ref has no URL and I can't find a matching article at rollingstone.com with google) --Jeremyb 04:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It was in a physical magazine, not the online one. Xihix 00:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Basket Case1.ogg

Image:Basket Case1.ogg 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 07:37, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

FA picture needs a changin'

I think the picture for the FA section on the main page should be the picture of the album, not Billy Joe Armstrong. When you click on the Dookie article, the first picture that comes up is the album cover. Comments please... -tbone (talk) 00:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I would stick with the free-use picture of Armstrong instead of the fair-use picture of the album cover. GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you cannot use fair use pictures on the main page. The Billie Joe picture is the best picture for the main page, as it's been released under a free license, and the picture represents the band well. xihix(talk) 05:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep of the few times when good free use image has been avilible for a MP article. Good job whoever found it. Buc (talk) 14:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

punk designation

since green day is more properly and specifically a specific subtype of punk known as pop-punk, i made this edit. given that it is a featured article, this added information is relevant to readers not familiar with the intracicies of various types of punk music 99.233.78.122 (talk) 07:02, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_punk for details and verification. 99.233.78.122 (talk) 07:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Green Day is PUNK ROCK! NOT POP PUNK! Jeeze... So many consider them pop. their not. They are FULL ON PUNK ROCK! Okay, four or five songs may be dangerously close to pop, but that doesnt describe the whole bad! Again... THEY ARE PUNK ROCK! NOT POP PUNK!--Greenday21 (talk) 05:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)greenday21

CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL

On a more serious note, the Pop-Punk article has a decent enough chunk on Green Day, Dookie in particular so it seems that Green Day is considered to be Pop-Punk, I'd find a source, however there's no need to, because the burden of proof is yours this time.Dannysjgdf (talk) 05:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

No. Green Day is more alternitive rock than punk. Though I do agree that they do have some punk/pop punk songs and albums they are mostly alternitive rock and the further back you go the truer this is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.11.174.161 (talk) 07:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

In The End

Since this is a featured article, I thought I should talk about including info of this song first. Billie Joe Armstrong wrote this song about his mother and her boyfriend (similar to Why Do You Want Him) I have a quote...

"That song is about my mother's husband, it's not really about a girl, or like anyone directly related to me in a relationship. In the End's about my mother." - Billie Joe

the link: http://www.greendayauthority.com/TheBand/songmeanings.php?section=dookie--Greenday21 (talk) 22:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)Greenday21

How do i insert a reference? the more sources the merrier.--Greenday21 (talk) 22:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)Greenday21

Alright, no ones responded for a couple of weeks now, so don't hate me for finding the article a little different. Better.--Greenday21 (talk) 02:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)Greenday21

Image copyright problem with Image:Longview.ogg

The image Image:Longview.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleted POV original research ("sold out" comment)

I deleted the comment at the end of the first paragraph about Green Day "selling out." If that's what editors think, they must find a source that backs up that critical assessment. Then, maybe, that comment can be included. But, for now, it's POV original research...and it's out. ask123 (talk) 13:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

See the body of the article. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Emenius Sleepus

Billie didn't co-write Emenius Sleepus, Mike wrote the song alone. --JohnnyDrama233 (talk) 22:26, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 July 2017

could you change part where it "Dookie was certified Diamond by the Recording Industry Association of America for the shipment of 10 million copies." to "Dookie was certified Diamond by the Recording Industry Association of America for the shipment of 11 million copies." and where it says "Throughout the 1990s, Dookie continued to sell well, eventually receiving diamond certification" and where it says" to "Throughout the 1990s, Dookie continued to sell well, eventually receiving an 11x platinum certification" and where it says in the certifications Diamond and 10,000,000 to 11x platinum and 11,900,000 as this link states it sold 11,900,000 Onlygodknowswhy (talk) 20:17, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Block evasion by Никита-Родин-2002. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 01:29, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

References