Talk:Simon & Garfunkel discography

Simon & Garfunkel discography is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on December 24, 2021.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 12, 2011	Featured list candidate	Not promoted
August 11, 2011	Featured list candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured list

Discographies

This article is within the scope of the Discographies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's collection of discography articles and lists. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to discography-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page.DiscographiesWikipedia:WikiProject DiscographiesTemplate:WikiProject DiscographiesDiscography articles

Roots music High‑importance

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to roots, folk and traditional folk music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Roots musicWikipedia:WikiProject Roots musicTemplate:WikiProject Roots musicRoots music articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by jjron, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 8 May 2011.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Old Friends box set

Why isn't the Old Friends 3-disc set released in 1997 on this list?

Fair use rationale for Image:Bookends.jpg

Image:Bookends.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 02:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BridgeWater.jpg

Image:BridgeWater.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 16:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ParsleySage.jpg

Image:ParsleySage.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 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 07:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SoundsSilence.jpg

Image:SoundsSilence.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 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 08:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definitive Simon & Garfunkel

Why isn't The Definitive Simon & Garfunkel (1991) on this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.176.130 (talk) 21:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the album (http://musicbrainz.org/release/2b36f7b8-82f7-4e92-bb2b-08a03635d41f.html) to the list. I cannot find the chart or RIAA certification information for the album. Does anyone know where such information can be obtained? 118.208.12.222 (talk) 09:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

at the official site-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 18:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questions out of copyedit of lead section

Re Tom & Jerry - the Simon & Garfunkel article uses both Tom & Jerry and Tom and Jerry. Can we clarify which one is right? The ref at the end of the sentence uses & when referring this first name, but the cartoon series is and.
Tom & Jerry named after the animated series? This is not cited (well there is a ref at the end of the sentence, but it does not say anything about the cartoon). It is also not claimed (or cited) in the main S&G article either. Even the related page on Tom & Jerry from the ref'ed site here doesn't link it to the cartoon. Can we get a ref for this? If not I'd remove it; it's not really necessary.
Re Wednesday Morning 3AM - this is a bit misleading; the album initially flopped, and did not chart until re-released in 1966 (according to Wednesday Morning, 3 A.M.). Reading this it sounds like the album was a success straight away. Apparently also "Sound of Silence" on the 1966 version was the remix, not the original? And the 'second' version of "Sound of Silence", as released on the second album, was not "live" as stated was it? The article on the album doesn't say so, and even The Sound of Silence says it was a remix, not a live version.
I wonder why release dates are stated - to the day - for some albums, while other albums, notably Sounds of Silence and Bookends don't even get a year. Wouldn't the year be sufficient, but should be given for them all (perhaps the first makes sense to be more specific)?
"... received 3× Multi-Platinum by RIAA", etc - this terminology and layout may be correct; I don't know how you're meant to express it though (where I come from we'd say something like "it went triple-Platinum"), so if you could just confirm it's right for the US.
seems to be a bit of bias towards to commenting on charting in US & UK; is this normal? Having said which, looking at the table below, there's maybe not a lot of info from other countries, especially for the early stuff.
it seems pretty long for a lead; again this may be normal for such a article, as I don't work with them much.

Generally looks pretty good. --jjron (talk) 15:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your review of the whole disco; this is the first time someone do this, respect :P! Here are my answers to your suggestions or questions.

I googled a bit and "Tom & Jerry" was more frequent than "Tom and Jerry" (also sites like allmusic, musicbrainz or amazon all cite them as "Tom & Jerry" and not "Tom and Jerry".
The thing with "named after the animated series..." was actually written by myself :P; I think it doesn't need any references, as it is logically that they named themselves after the nominated series. Anyway... I removed it.
I reworded this. Thanks (thought it was a live version, just overdubbed :P)
I added release dates.
I would say so, but you are not the first one who mentioned this (other said it was grammatically incorrect :P). I don't know; for me (as a non-native english speaker) it is correct. I'll try to reword that later.
Yes, in my opinion, it is normal to mention only two countries. US, France and the CoN nations are the most-important in my opinion, but if an album would receive a Diamond certification from Brazil for example, I would mention that.
Think it's OK how it is now. There are many discos who have a big lead, much bigger than this here; see for example Eminem discography ;/.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 17:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Simon & Garfunkel discography. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:22, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Simon & Garfunkel discography. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://infodisc.fr/Album_S.php
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ifpi.at/?section=goldplatin
Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/65OsK5Fu7?url=http://www.nvpi.nl/goud-platina-overzicht/audio to http://www.nvpi.nl/goud-platina-overzicht/audio
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bpi.co.uk/certifiedawards/search.aspx

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:34, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Simon & Garfunkel discography. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

new release

I will note that they released a live EP in 2020 called Live At Carnegie Hall 1969 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minemaster1337 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Differences

Some of the positions on the Norway "paper" chart differ from the positions on the on-line version of the same chart. Example: Simon and Garfunkel's "Homeward Bound" is at its #12 peak on the "paper" chart on May 10, 1966, (https://www.hitsallertijden.nl/charts/swedish%20charts/SwedishCharts%200366-0969.pdf) but at #14 on the corresponding on-line chart (https://www.nostalgilistan.se/kvallstoppen/19660510), which also shows that it peaked instead at #13 on May 24, 1966.(https://www.nostalgilistan.se/kvallstoppen/19660524)98.149.97.245 (talk) 22:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]